$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7249/2017, CM APPL. 28582/2019, CM APPL. 32232-

32233/2019, CM APPL. 39742/2019, CM APPL. 53707/2019 & CM APPL. 23290/2020 RAKESH DWIVEDI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satyajit Sarna, Mr. Sudev Singh Juneja, Mr. Debarchan De & Mr.

Aman Goyal, Advocates versus COAL INDIA LTD. THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN-CUM-MD &

ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. V.K. Garg, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Raj Karan Sharma, Mr. Alok Yadav & Mr. K.S. Rekhi, Advocates for R-1 CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 13.01.2026

1. The Petitioner, a former executive of Coal India Limited (“CIL”), invokes the writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking a mandamus to treat his promotion to Chief Manager (Electrical & Mechanical) (Grade E-7) as effective from 1^st April, 2013, with consequential fixation of seniority and attendant benefits. The grievance is confined to the effective date, and the cascading loss of seniority, progression and retiral benefits.

2. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2.1. The Petitioner joined Coal India Limited (“CIL”) on 16^th December, 1987 as a Junior Executive Trainee and was promoted to E6 Grade on 23^rd September, 2002.

2.2. On 03^rd May, 2011, CIL issued guidelines governing promotions of executives from E6 to E7 Grade, inter alia providing that promotions would be subject to requisite clearances.

2.3. A Departmental Promotion Committee (“DPC”) was convened on 07^th March, 2013 for promotion from E6 to E7 Grade (E&M discipline), for vacancies pertaining to the years 2010, 2011 and 2012. The Petitioner’s name was recommended for promotion, and as per the DPC proceedings dated 07^th March, 2013, his name appeared at Serial No. 87.

2.4. Promotion orders pursuant to the said process were thereafter issued by CIL between 01^st April, 2013 and 16^th April, 2013. Several officers junior to the petitioner were promoted to Grade E-7 in that window. The petitioner was excluded. The reason later conveyed was that his requisite clearances were not received “in time”.

2.5. The petitioner protested promptly. He made representations dated 23^rd December, 2013 and 27^th June, 2014, followed by further representations on 6^th February, 2017, 31^st March, 2017, 5^th April, 2017 and 24^th May, 2017, seeking issuance of promotion order along with notional seniority from 1^st April, 2013.

2.6. Meanwhile, the promotions granted under the 2011 promotion policy became subject matter of challenge before the Calcutta High Court in W.P. No. 12002(W) of 2013. By judgment dated 26^th September, 2014, the Single Judge set aside the challenged policy and the connected promotion orders.

2.7. In consequence, CIL issued a reversion order dated 24^th February, 2016, whereby executives who had been promoted to Grade E-7 under the new policy, but were not promotable under the old policy, were reverted to Grade E-6.

2.8. The reversion order dated 24^th February, 2016 was challenged before the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court. By order dated 03^rd March, 2016 in A.S.T. 83 of 2016, the Division Bench stayed the operation of the reversion order and directed parties to maintain status quo.

2.9. The aforesaid appeals were finally decided by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court vide judgment dated 12^th January, 2017. In the course of hearing, CIL made submissions that it was willing to grant promotion, subject to DPC, to all the writ petitioners, as well as to private respondents and applicants who had preferred applications for leave to appeal, from E6 to E7 Grade, and it was recorded that in view of such submissions, “equities stand balanced among the parties.” Thereafter, the Division Bench dismissed the appeals and affirmed the Single Judge’s judgment dated 26^th September, 2014, subject to the directions contained in the said appellate judgment.

2.10 Consequent upon the dismissal of appeals on 12^th January, 2017, CIL proceeded on the basis that the earlier promotion process stood revived. It is recorded that, by an order dated 19^th/20^th Janua