Prashant Kumar, J.@mdashIn this writ application, petitioners prayed for quashing of Annexure-9 whereby respondent no. 1 rejected representations of the petitioners by giving reason that National Certificate in supervision issued by National Productivity Council could not be taken into consideration for giving weightage for career growth, because it cannot be equated with the laid down norms formulated in the cadre scheme for promotion of Non-Executive employee of the E & M Discipline of the Company. Petitioners farther prayed for issuance of a direction commanding the respondents to recognize National Certificate in supervison issued by National Productivity Council and give weightage to the petitioners in the matter of promotion Petitioner no. 1 is registered Trade Union, whereas petitioner no. 2 and the workmen named in Annexure-1 are members of petitioner no. 1. It is stated that petitioner no. 2 and workmen named in Annexure-1, are matriculate and ITI Certificate holder from recognize Institute and working continuously in the coal washery of respondent company. It is stated that while the petitioner no. 2 and other workmen were working under the respondents they completed National Certificate in Supervision Course conducted by National Productivity Council and obtained aforesaid Certificate. It is stated that said Certificate is recognized by Government of India as well as erstwhile National Coal Development Corporation. It stated that as petitioner no. 2 and other workmen obtained National Certificate in Supervision, they requested respondents to recognize said certificate and give them weightage in the matter of promotion from Non-Executive Cadre to Supervisory Cadre It is further stated that when respondents did not give any heed to the aforesaid request, petitioner no. 2 filed a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 2370/1994(R), which was disposed of by Annexure-6 and petitioners were given liberty to file fresh representation before respondent no. 1 and respondent no. 1 was directed to dispose of the said representation within two months. It appears that petitioners filed their representation (Annexure-7 and 8) before respondent no. 1. Aforesaid representations disposed of by order dated 13.11.1995 (Annexure-9). It appears that respondent no. 1 rejected the representations on the following grounds:
In accordance with the said rules of the company in vogue inter alia for the career growth of the non-executive employees in E&M discipline, an employee should possess either ITI Certificate or 3-year Diploma in Electrical or Mechanical Engineering for being considered for promotion to higher rank/grade. The Certificate as obtained by the petitioner from the National Productivity Council is one year Correspondence Programe and cannot be equated with the laid down norms formulated for the Cadre Scheme. The position being so, the certificate as referred to above, cannot be taken into consideration for giving weightage for career growth to the said discipline.
Hence, the representation dated 31.8.1995 of the petitioner does not have any merit for giving weightage, as prayed for.
2. Petitioners challenged the aforesaid order of respondent no. 1 in this writ application.
3. Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that National Certificate in Supervision issued by National Productivity Council is recognized by Government India. It is submitted that as per cadre scheme, any qualification recognized by Central Government or State Government or qualification/test prescribed and conducted by the company will be considered for appointment and/or promotion. It Is submitted that since petitioners obtained National Certificate in Supervision, therefore, they are entitle to get due weightage in the matter of promotion. It is submitted that respondents arbitrarily not recognizing said certificate by saying that the same is not equal to the norms mentioned in the cadre scheme. Accordingly, it is submitted that impugned order is liable to be quashed and a direction be issued commanding the respondents to recognize said certificate and give weightage to the petitioners in the matter of promotion.
4. On the other hand, Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that supervisory grade starts from the post of Assistant Foreman grade ''C''. He submits that on the said post 3-years Diploma holder in Electrical/Mechanical Engineering can be appointed or a Mechanical Fitter category VI, who passed selection test and has six years'' experience can be promoted. It is submitted that though National Certificate in Supervision is recognized by Government of India but the same has not been recognized as equivalent to 3-years Diploma in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering. He submits that aforesaid facts had been clarified by National Productivity Council vide Annexure-10. Accordingly, he submits that respondent no. 1 rightly rejected the representations of petitioners by saying that National Certification in Supervision issued by National Productivity Council cannot be equated with the norms prescribed for promotion in the cadre scheme. It is submitted that if the cadre scheme framed under the Coal Wage Agreement, does not prescribe that any weightage be given to an incumbent who obtained National Certificate in Supervision, then petitioners have no right to claim such weightage.
5. Having heard the submissions, I have gone through the records of the case.
6. From perusal of cadre scheme (Annexure-2), it is clear that supervisory grade starts from the post of Assistant Foreman. As per cadre scheme, a diploma holder in Electrical/Mechanical Engineering can be appointed as Assistant Foreman. According to cadre scheme apart from Diploma holder a Mechanical Fitter Category-VI, who passed selection test and has six year experience can be promoted as Assistant Fore-man. There is no provision in the cadre scheme for giving weightage to workman in the matter of promotion, if he obtains National Certificate in Supervision. Thus, petitioners are not entitle to be promoted out of turn, only because they obtained National Certificate in Supervision, unless they show that said certificate is equivalent to 3-years diploma in Electrical or Mechanical Engineering.
7. It appears that General Manager (HRD), Northern Coalfields Limited wrote a letter to the Director (Supervision & Development), National Productivity Council requesting him to clarify as to whether National Certificate in Supervision should be treated as equivalent to diploma. Said letter was replied vide Annexure-11, wherein it is clearly stated that National Certificate in Supervision is recognized by Government of India. However, it is not possible to work out its equivalency with other qualification. Thus, from perusal of Annexure-11, it is clear that even National Productivity Council is hesitating in recognizing National Certificate in Supervision as equivalent to Diploma in Engineering. Nothing has been brought on record by petitioners to show that Government of India recognized National Certificate in Supervision as equivalent to Diploma in Engineering. Under the said circumstance, I find that respondent no. 1 rightly rejected the representations of petitioners by saying that they are not entitled to get weightage in the matter of promotion in Supervisory grade, because certificate obtained by them from National Productivity Council cannot be equated with the norms of promotion formulated in the cadre scheme.
8. In my view second prayer of petitioners can not be allowed. Fixation of qualification for promotion is internal policy matter of the company. It appears from Annexure ''2'' that present cadre scheme/ promotion rules finalized by the policy committee of the company on the basis of scheme formulated under Coal Wage Agreement It is well settled that a writ court can not give direction commanding the State to take certain policy decision. In view of discussions made above, I find no merit in this writ application. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, parties shall bear their own cost.
