1. Heard Mr. N K Kalita, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The Food Corporation of India (FCI) and their offices are represented by the learned Counsel Mr. P K Roy.

2. The grievance of the petitioner relates to his non-promotion to the cadre of AG-II (D) in the FCI w.e.f. the date of promotion of his juniors. During pendency of this case, the petitioner has superannuated from service on 30.11.2011.

3. The learned Counsel Mr. N K Kalita refers to the communication dated 24.8.2009 (Page-73) of the employer to project that the petitioner was not considered for promotion on account of the low grading in his ACRs and therefore, the concerned entries recorded in the ACRs, should have been communicated to the employee, as those impacted his opportunity for promotion.

4. The petitioner contends that if a benchmark is stipulated on the kinds of grades to be secured by an employee in his previous ACRs, for being promoted to the next higher rank, any grading below the benchmark should have been communicated but in the instant case, the 3 “fair” grading for the petitioner