A K Tripathi (Executive) 04 December 2010

Non Recommendation for Promotion by DPC even having vacancy

Dear Members

I am an executive of a CPSU. For the promotion to the post of Chief grade interview was held by DPC on 27.02.2009. There were total 18 post of Chief grade vacant in the disciplines of Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, Environment and Medical. However, all the eligible executives were called for interview even where no vacancy exists like HR, IT, Geology and Finance. In total 18 executives were recommended and promoted by the DPC including the executives of HR, IT, Geology and Finance disciplines where no vacancy exists. For the post of Chief (Environment) only one executive was promoted inspite of 2 vacant post and I was not promoted even being second in seniority.

As undersigned was not promoted, I appealed the CMD requesting to review the promotion case and promote me w.e.f. 27.02.2009. The same was rejected by management mentioning that “the DPC did not recommend your name for promotion to the post of Chief (Environment). In view of the above, we regret our in ability to consider your appeal.”

After this, on my request the information/document were supplied by the RTI Cell, and on examining the same, following was revealed:-

There were total 18 post of Chief grade vacant in the disciplines Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, Environment and Medical.
In total 57 eligible executives were called for interview including the executives of HR, IT, Geology and Finance disciplines where no vacancy exists.
There were two vacant posts (out of 03 sanctioned posts) against the post of Chief (Environment) for which the interview was held.
Three Senior Manager (Environment) were called for interview against the post of Chief (Environment) and undersigned was second in the seniority.
Break up of DPC marks awarded to undersigned is as below:

i. PAR marks - 54

ii. Interview -20

iii. Total - 74

From the marks awarded as aforesaid, it is clear that undersigned got aggregate 74 marks (54 PAR + 20 Interview marks) and crossed the minimum qualifying marks required i.e., 58.5 as per Companies promotion policy.
Only one Senior Manager of Environment Discipline was promoted as Chief (Environment), against the two vacant posts, who got total 80 marks (60 PAR + 20 Interview marks)
Some executives of IT, Geology, HR and Finance disciplines were promoted where no vacancy was available.
Some of the executives who got total 74 marks were promoted but even after getting 74 marks I was not promoted. Even, an executive of Finance discipline, who got less marks than me (Total 73 marks) was promoted as Chief (Finance) where no vacancy was existing.

Further, during the interview of February, 2010 I was called but I was not recommended by the DPC and the Management has promoted my junior who got less total marks (i.e. 68 only) during the interview of February, 2009. As such, it appears that my Management with mallafide intention became annoyed with me when I obtained the information through RTI, Act and exposed them.

Thanking you in anticipation. Please save me from this mental torture and injustice done by my management. I request the members to put across their view and suggestion on this. I would like to file a writ petition in Hon’ble Court. Please suggest me the legal position and kindly extend/furnish the relevant references and judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court/ High Courts. Please do not hesitate to ask me any further information required.

Sincerely yours,

AKT

Email ID: anilnhpc1@rediffmail.com

Reply Follow

2 Replies

niranjan (civil practice) 04 December 2010

You should also ask for report submitted by DPC and find out the reason given by the DPC.Since you have mentioned 'promotion' it means that it was not direct recruit. So it could be either by way of seniority-cum-merit but in this case it seems it is by way of merit-cum-seniority,though you have also not mentioned seniority counts any way You have alsonot mentioned whether CRs are tobe seen.But before going to HC you must have rules for promotion.Whether DE isx pending or contemplated against you. Many factors are tobe considered..

A K Tripathi (Executive) 06 December 2010

Further, in response to reply given by “Expert Lawyer”, some other/additional facts are as below;

1. The relevant clauses of my company’s promotion policy are as under:

· Promotion to the post of Senior Manager and above will be subject to availability of vacancy.

· The number of eligible executives to be considered for promotion in case of promotion by selection shall not exceed three times the number of vacancies available in various posts.

Promotion to the post of Sr. Managers and above shall be by selection based on merit with seniority taking secondary role. Seniority will, however, be the deciding factor between officers securing equal marks. The DPC shall interview the eligible managers and above as the case may be to assess their suitability for promotion to the post of Sr. Managers and above.

· The DPC shall interview executives in the grades of E-5 and above with a view to ascertain their suitability for the next higher position. Marks for interview shall be awarded by the DPC taking into consideration factors like educational qualifications, professional knowledge, ability to reason out logically, presentation of ideas coherently, environmental awareness, leadership, potential for decision making, communication skills, commitment to the organization etc.

PROMOTION FROM MANAGER (E-5) TO SENIOR MANAGER (E-6) AND ABOVE.

· Promotion from Manager to Senior Manager and above shall be based on selection with seniority taking a secondary role and factors as mentioned herein below shall be taken into consideration.

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL REPORTS -60 MARKS

· Performance Appraisal Reports shall constitute 6o marks in all. The appraisal system will be on a five points scale i.e. Outstanding, Very good, Good, Average and Poor. Each of these ratings have been defined in the formats of appraisal reports. For the purpose of aggregation marks shall be allotted to various ratings as under:

Outstanding 12

Very Good 10

Good 08

Average 06

Poor 00

· An executive whose Performance Appraisal report for any of three years is poor immediately preceding the year of consideration shall not be considered for promotion by the DPC. Adverse entries in the PARs shall also be taken into consideration by the DPC. The minimum qualifying marks for promotion in PAR shall be 46.

INTERVIEW 30 MARKS

· The DPC will award up-to a maximum of 30 marks to each eligible executive for interview in terms of sub-para 10.5 of the Rule, keeping in view the relevant factors defined therein.

QUALIFYING MARKS

· Marks secured by each eligible candidate in terms of sub-paras 12.2 and 12.4 shall be aggregated. To qualify for promotion each eligible candidate must secure a minimum aggregate of 58.5 marks in case of General Candidates and 54 marks in case of SC/ST Candidates subject to the condition that the candidate must secure a minimum of 15 marks in case of General Candidates and 13 marks in case of SC/ST Candidates in the interview.

CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION

· While preparing panel for promotion from Manager to Senior Manager, unless there is difference of three marks, the seniority should not be disturbed. But in case of promotion to Chief Engineer/Chief and above the panel of officers for promotion shall be strictly on merit.

· The DPC shall interview executives in the grades of E-5 and above with a view to ascertain their suitability for the next higher position. Marks for interview shall be awarded by the DPC taking into consideration factors like educational qualifications, professional knowledge, ability to reason out logically, potential for decision making, communication skills, commitment to the organization etc.

· Subject to fulfillment of the principles, minimum criteria and other conditions as laid down herein and subject to other relevant rules and orders in force in the Corporation, the DPC shall recommend for the approval; of the Chairman and Managing Director or any competent authority, a panel of names of eligible employees/executives, who are considered suitable for promotion to positions in the next higher grades/posts. Where the CMD himself is the Chairman of the DPC the said panel shall be deemed to have been approved. The panel so approved shall constitute the basis and authority for promotion of employees/ executives to the appropriate higher grade/post.

2. On my enquiry the management has given the proceedings of DPC, through RTI Act, wherein DPC has recommended the names of 18 executives for the promotion to the post of Chief/ Chief Engineer in order of merit subject to availability of vacancy. As I understand the role of DPC has to conduct the interview and recommend a panel of names of eligible executives instead in the present case the DPC has recommended the names of 18 executives for the promotion. DPC has not mentioned/given any reason for non promotion/recommendation of my name.

3. Though I have not seen CRs (confidential reports) but through RTI, I came to know that I have got 54 marks (out of 60) which depicts that in the last five years there were three very good and two outstanding rating has been given in my favour.

4. There are no disciplinary action/vigilance enquiry pending or contemplated against me.

5. I approached to Grievance Redressal Authority in Oct. 2009 regarding my non promotion and they replied in Aug. 2010. In which the reply was same as given by management that your name was not recommended by DPC.

6. There may be so many reasons by which my CMD has personally annoyed with me. Which are as under and probably for this reason I have not been promoted.

When undersigned was not promoted and my appeal was turn down by the management, I obtained relevant information under RTI Act, which clearly proves the malice of management against me.
I was General Secretary of All India Officers Association since Oct. 2005 till June 2010. This is the period when the present CMD (from October, 2005 till date) is on the post. At various occasions, I have strongly put up our viewpoints in favour of Company and Officers before the management for which CMD (Personally) might have annoyed with me.
After obtaining the relevant information under RTI Act, I approached the company’s Grievance Redressal Authority (GDA) as well as Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
During the promotion of Feb. 2009 all the eligible executives were called for the interview and also promoted even without vacancy in their concern discipline which are against the promotion policy of company. This aspect has been highlighted in my letter to CVC and probably with intervention of CVC during the promotion of Feb. 2010 only those eligible executives were called, where vacancies were available. This act stopped the arbitrariness/ illegality of management.
There were three eligible executives and two clear cut vacancy in Environment discipline during the promotion of year Feb. 2009 and I was at second position in seniority as well as merit both.
The total marks given to the SM’s (Environment) were 80 (60 PAR marks+20 Interview marks), 74 (54 PAR marks+20 Interview marks) and 68 (52 PAR marks+16 Interview marks) but only one executive was promoted and second vacancy was diverted to another discipline where vacancy was not available. Further during the interview of Feb. 2010 the vacancy in Environment discipline was shown and interview was called to both executives i.e., myself and my junior. At this time the DPC has deliberately failed me in interview (given less marks as required for promotion) and recommended the name of my junior for promotion to the post of Chief (Environment), who was junior to me in seniority and got less marks during the interview of Feb. 2009.