Merit-based promotion rules gave Category I Executive Engineers priority over Category II, overriding feeder cadre seniority.

Promotion to Superintending Engineer under the service regulations was governed by merit-based category placement, with Executive Engineers placed in Category I having priority over those in Category II. Seniority in the feeder cadre could operate only within the same category and could not override the prescribed category-wise preference. The classification was treated as rational and supported by intelligible differentia, so the contention that all eligible Executive Engineers stood on the same footing was rejected. A concession on law was held not to bind the parties, and the regulations were construed independently. Category I officers were therefore entitled to precedence in promotion over Category II officers.

---

---

Issues: Whether promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer from the post of Executive Engineer under the service regulations was governed by merit-based category placement so that officers in Category I had priority over officers in Category II, and whether inter se seniority of Executive Engineers in the feeder cadre could override such category-wise preference.

Analysis: The regulations and the selection procedure provided that promotion to higher posts, including Superintending Engineer, was to be made on the basis of merit. Eligible Executive Engineers were first to be categorized on the basis of marks, with Category I comprising officers securing the highest merit and Category II comprising the next eligible class. The list for promotion was to be prepared by first selecting Category I officers according to their seniority within that category and only thereafter, if vacancies remained, considering Category II officers. The relevant scheme therefore created distinct classes, and seniority in the feeder cadre could operate only within the same category, not across different categories. The classification was held to be rational and supported by an intelligible differentia, and the contention that all eligible Executive Engineers stood on the same footing was rejected. The Court also noted that a concession on law could not bind a party, but the case was decided on the correct construction of the regulations rather than on any supposed concession.

Conclusion: Category I Executive Engineers were entitled to precedence for promotion over Category II Executive Engineers, and the appellant was not entitled to challenge the direction granting relief to the writ petitioner.

---