S. MURALIDHAR, J.

1. The Petitioner, who was working as a Junior Engineer (JE) (Civil) in the Border Roads Organization (BRO) has approached the Court seeking directions to the Respondents to antedate his promotion from the date when the first person who was junior to the Petitioner in obtaining the eligibility/fitness for the post was promoted.

2. The Petitioner joined the BRO as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on 4th January, 1996. In 2001, he passed the departmental exam. In terms of the policy of the GREF, he was sent to the College of Military Engineering (CME), Pune for undergoing a diploma in Civil Engineering which was a requirement for promotion to the post of JE (Civil) under the 10% Departmental Promotion Quota (DPQ) for CME Diploma holders. It is stated that the nomination for the diploma programme at CME, Pune was based on passing the departmental exam. In the relevant years, only five employees in the order of merit in the departmental competitive exam, followed by the CME exam, were considered.

3. The Petitioner states that he passed the Diploma in Civil Engineering Course from CME, Pune and, therefore, was eligible for promotion to the post of JE (Civil). However, those who passed the exam in subsequent years were promoted earlier to the Petitioner. The examples of four such employees have been set out in a tabular form in the petition. This according to the Petitioner was on the basis of the dates of their initial joining and was contrary to the general policy regarding Eligibility and Seniority contemplated in the Recruitment and Promotion (R and P) Rules. It is stated that an individual who is eligible/fit first shall have to be considered first for promotion. Reliance is placed on the communication dated 10th April, 2007 addressed by the Headquarters of the Directorate General (Border Roads) to the present Petitioner stating that the Petitioner would be considered for promotion to Superintendent (Grade-II) as per his seniority subject to fulfilling promotional norms and availability of vacancies.

4. The Petitioner states that he was granted the first Assured Career Progression (ACP) in January, 2008, since he was not promoted for the post of JE (Civil) in the year in which he became eligible i.e. 2004. After a delay of around four years, the Petitioner was granted promotion as JE (Civil) (earlier designated as BR-2) in the pay scale of 9,300- 34,800 with grade pay of Rs. 4,200 with effect from 27th March, 2008. This was two months after the Compulsory Financial Upgradation on the completion of 12 years in service. According to the Petitioner, in terms of the Office Memorandum (OM) dated 19th May, 2009 issued by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), the Petitioner should have been given the benefit of the Modified ACP (MACP) after completion of 20 years (slab of 10/20/30 years).

5. After completion of 20 years of service, on 4th April 2016, the Petitioner made a representation to the Respondents for financial upgradation to the next grade of Rs. 4,600/-. The said representation was rejected by the Directorate General, BRO by letter dated 27th May 2016, stating that the Petitioner would be eligible for the MACP after completion of 30 years of service. Another representation was made by the Petitioner on 27th June, 2016. A reminder was sent on 4th August, 2016. He also requested, by a representation dated 15th November 2016, for a personal interview. He submitted an RTI application on 22nd November, 2016 which was rejected by a letter dated 14th December, 2016. In the circumstances, the Petitioner approached this Court.

6. In reply to the present petition, it is explained by the Respondents that the four instances cited by the Petitioner, viz. the earlier promotion of Kukade Dhanraj, Rohtash Kumar and Nallasivan M and Ajit Kumar, who were all JE (Civil) was not because they acquired the CME Diploma in 2005 in different batches, later than the Petitioner. According to the Respondents, they were consid