Judgment :- D. Murugesan, J. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 03-02-1999 in allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent in this writ appeal. 2. The appellants' company is incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is governed by the same. In exercise of the powers under the said Act, the appellants' company has evolved "PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED IN GENERAL INSURANCE INDUSTRY FOR RECRUITMENT OF CLERICAL AND SUBORDINATE STAFF". The claim of the respondent is for promotion from the post of Assistant to the post of Senior Assistant and hence, we refer the relevant paragraphs of the Policy. 3. Paragraph-16 of the Policy relates to the minimum qualification for appointment to the posts other than Typist and the same reads as under:- "a.For recruitment in the scale of Assistant: 1) Other than Typists: i. Graduate of Recognized University OR pass in HSC with 60% marks (50% for Ex-servicemen, SC/ST and Physically Handicapped candidates) and ii. Knowledge of Regional Knowledge i.e. Language of the State of Recruitment is essential. 4. Paragraph-29 relates to promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistants. The said paragraph reads as under:- "G-Promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistants 29. Employees in the Assistant's scale who have:- (a)put in at least 3 years service in the cadre and are qualified as A.I.I.I. or A.C.I.I. or have passed 2 subjects of the Institute of Actuaries, or (b)put in at least 5 years service in the cadre and have passed Licentiate Examination of the I.I.I., or (c)put in at least 7 years service in the cadre, or (d)reached the ceiling of the Assistants scale, shall be considered for promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistants. 29.1 Selection shall be made on the basis of seniority, qualifications, work record. 29.A Promotion to the cadres of Senior Assistants (Programmers):- 29.A.1 Employees satisfying eligibility norms prescribed in paragraph 29 for promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistant and have passed the Aptitude Test for the post of Programmer. 29.A.2 Selection shall be made on the basis of seniority qualifications, work record. 1.Applications from existing Senior Assistants shall also be invited and they will be allowed to appear at the Aptitude Test for the post of Programmer. 29.A.2 Selection shall be made on the basis of seniority qualifications, work record. 1.Applications from existing Senior Assistants shall also be invited and they will be allowed to appear at the Aptitude Test for the post of Programmer. Such Senior Assistants who pass the test shall be selected and deployed as per guidelines for deployment of Senior Assistants as programmers issued by GIC from time to time. 2.Only if adequate number of Senior Assistants are not available for deployment as Programmers, the remaining vacancies i.e., promotional vacancies will be filled in by promotion from amongst employees applying and selected as Programmers in terms of paragraph 29.A.1." 5. Section III of the Policy relates to the Appraisal and Paragraph-A relates to General. Paragraph-39 relates to the award of marks for academic qualification and professional qualification. Before considering an Assistant to be included in the panel for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant, we would like to extract paragraph-39 of the Policy, which reads as under:- "39. Qualification (in case of promotions to the cadres other than Record Clerks): Marks for academic qualification and professional qualifications shall be assigned separately but the limitations on the maximum for qualifications shall operate on the total marks. In the Scheme of weightage for qualifications the marks for the highest qualisifaction only shall be given. (a) Academic qualifications (Maximum marks 15) for promotions to the cadres of AAO, Senior Assistant (including Programmers), Stenographer and Assistant. i. Below S.S.C.E. 0 ii. S.S.C.E. 5 iii.HSC/Intermediate 7 iv. Graduate 12 v. Post Graduate or double Graduate 15 " 6. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, Insurance Division, in its office memorandum dated 9.5.1988 has directed as follows with regard to the promotion eligibility or seniority fixation:- "(B) Promotion eligibility/seniority fixation It has been decided that service rendered by the Ex-Servicemen in the Armed Forces shall not be counted to promotion eligibility and seniority fixation as demanded by them since this will disturb the seniority of existing employees. This will also invite avoidable litigation and other related problems like unrest amongst the unions of other than ex-servicemen. In other words, re-employed Ex-Servicemen shall not be entitled to any benefit of their defence service for the purpose of promotion eligibility/seniority fixation and they shall have to compete with other employees". This will also invite avoidable litigation and other related problems like unrest amongst the unions of other than ex-servicemen. In other words, re-employed Ex-Servicemen shall not be entitled to any benefit of their defence service for the purpose of promotion eligibility/seniority fixation and they shall have to compete with other employees". Paragraph-C of the said Memorandum relates to reservations in vacancies and the same reads as follows:- "(C) Reservations in vacancies. i.Both LIC and GIC shall reserve 14 ½ % and 24 ½ % of the vacancies in Class III and Class IV cadres respectively for Ex-Servicemen as laid down in the Bureau of Public Enterprises OM NO.6/(55)/79-BPE(GM-I)dated 13.3.1980. ii.There shall be no reservations in class II vacancies since this is the cadre of Development Staff for which there are entirely different norms for recruitment. iii.There shall be no carry-forward of any left-over vacancies in any recruitment year to the next recruitment year. " 7. The respondent joined the Indian Air Force in the year 1963 and he served up to 30-06-1978, on which date, he was discharged from the Indian Air Force. He applied to the Appellants' Insurance Company for the post of Assistant placing reliance on the certificate dated 27-01-1978 evidencing that the respondent has passed Indian Air Force Educational test for promotion to the rank of Corporeal held during February 1968. The said certificate reads as under. " INDIAN AIR FORCE CERTIFICATE IAF EDUCATIONAL TEST FOR PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF CORPORAL "This is to certify that No.248464 Rank LAC Name B.Rajamani Trade turner has passed the IAF Educational Test for promotion to the rank of Corporal held in February 1968 by Air Headquarters, NEW DELHI under Scheme "A". He has also passed the trade test for reclassification to leading Aircraftmen held in 1967 by No. Two Touring Central Test Board, Air Force. Date: 27th January, 1978 Director of Education Seal of Dte of Edn. Air Headquarters NEW DELHI." 8. The respondent was considered for inclusion of his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the year 1993. As he did not come within the zone of consideration for seven vacancies, he was not promoted, though the respondent was included in the panel. Air Headquarters NEW DELHI." 8. The respondent was considered for inclusion of his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the year 1993. As he did not come within the zone of consideration for seven vacancies, he was not promoted, though the respondent was included in the panel. Likewise, in the year 1994, though the respondent was included in the panel for the four posts of Senior Assistant, he was not promoted, as he did not secure the minimum cut off marks of 38. In the circumstances, it appears that the respondent had made a request to the appellants' Company to equate his educational qualification viz., Matriculate together with 15 years of service in the Indian Air Force as graduation for awarding marks for promotion to Senior Grade. It would be relevant to add at this stage, as per paragraph-39, an Assistant is entitled to seven marks for Higher Secondary and 12 marks for graduation. In both the above panels, which we have referred, the respondent was awarded only seven marks based upon the Higher Secondary Certificate. The request of the respondent was rejected by the impugned order, which was questioned in the writ petition. The learned Single Judge found that the respondent was appointed in terms of Clause (4) of Rule 6 of the Rules notified on 12.2.1986 as Assistant. The learned Judge further observed that as per the said Clause, the essential educational qualification is graduation and therefore, having granted relaxation in the educational qualification for the appointment, the Insurance Company ought to have extended the same for promotion also as per the Office Memorandum dated 14.10.1991. Holding so, the learned Judge directed the appellants' Insurance Company to award 12 marks to the respondent on the ground that he was a graduate and consider him for promotion. This order is under challenge in this writ appeal. 9. Mr.A.L.Somayaji, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants' Insurance Company, would submit that the Rules relied upon viz., Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 are applicable only to Central Civil Services and Posts. This order is under challenge in this writ appeal. 9. Mr.A.L.Somayaji, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants' Insurance Company, would submit that the Rules relied upon viz., Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 are applicable only to Central Civil Services and Posts. Though a similar provision viz., Rule-6 of the Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979, entitling an Ex-serviceman for consideration of appointment for Grade-C posts in any reserved vacancy, the respondent was appointed only in terms of paragraph-16 of the Policy adopted by the Appellants Insurance Company for recruitment. As per the said paragraph, even an Ex-serviceman, who has passed his higher secondary certificate with 50% of marks, is entitled to be considered for the post of Assistant. In view of the same, it is not correct to say that the respondent was appointed only in terms of Rule 6 of the Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979. The learned Senior Counsel would further submit that equally as per the Promotion Policy, the Promotion is not strictly on the basis of seniority, but it is on the basis of selection considering seniority, qualification and work record. In terms of paragraph-39 of the Policy, for consideration of promotion, marks are awarded to the Assistants based upon their academic qualifications. Since the respondent has completed only a matriculate together with a certificate issued by the Indian Air Force, which is considered equivalent to Higher Secondary Certificate, he was awarded seven marks. Merely because the respondent was appointed as Assistant only with the qualification of Higher Secondary Certificate with 50% of marks, he cannot seek that he is a graduate entitling himself to have an award of 12 marks. In any case, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that when there is a specific policy for appointment and promotion by the appellants' Insurance Company, the Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India in relation to the appointment to the post in Central Civil Services cannot be automatically made applicable to the appointments made in the Appellants' Insurance Company. 10. Per contra, Miss.Suguna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that the appointment itself was made pursuant to the certificate issued by the Indian Air Force dated 27.1.1978. 10. Per contra, Miss.Suguna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that the appointment itself was made pursuant to the certificate issued by the Indian Air Force dated 27.1.1978. As per the said certificate, the Indian Air Force Educational test for promotion to the rank of Corporal shall be held to be equivalent to a graduation. According to the learned counsel, this view is substantiated by the subsequent certificate issued during December 1992 by Indian Air Force. Since much reliance is placed on the said certificate, we would like to extract the same, which is as follows:- " I N D I A N A I R F O R C E C e r t i f i c a t e This is to certify that as per Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training) OM No.15012/8/82,Estt(D) dated 12 Feb 86, ex-servicemen who are matriculate (which term includes an ex-servicement who has obtained the Indian Army Special Certificate of Education or the corresponding certificate in the Navy or Air Force), and has put in not less than 15 years of service in the Armed Forces of the Union may be considered eligible for appointment to any reserved vacancy in Group(C) posts for which the essential qualification is graduation and where experience of technical or professional nature is not essential. In view of the above concession, Service Number E-248464 Rank Corporal Name & initials Rajamani B Trade W/S Fit(M) who had served in the I A F for 15 years & Nil days from 01-7-63 to 30-06-78 may be considered educationally qualified for Group 'C' posts where prescribed qualification is graduation. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, in view of the above certificate, the qualification of the respondent in the matriculate together with his service of 15 years in the Indian Air Force should be considered as graduation and in that event, the respondent is entitled to 12 marks. 11. She would also submit that the Circulars issued by the Government of India is binding on the Appellants' Insurance Company. Inasmuch as the Government of India is the controlling authority of the appellants' company in terms of Circular dated 14.10.1991, the relaxation given for the appointment shall also be extended to the promotion. 11. She would also submit that the Circulars issued by the Government of India is binding on the Appellants' Insurance Company. Inasmuch as the Government of India is the controlling authority of the appellants' company in terms of Circular dated 14.10.1991, the relaxation given for the appointment shall also be extended to the promotion. In that event, having appointed the respondent on the ground that he was a graduate, the same relaxation, if extended for promotion also, the respondent is entitled to award 12 marks. 12. We have anxiously considered the above submissions. It is true that the Government of India in exercise of power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India have framed the Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979 for recruitment of Ex-servicemen in Central Civil Service posts. In the absence of any specific Rule/Policy for appointment of Ex-servicemen in the Appellants' company, certainly the respondent would be justified in placing reliance on Clause (4) of Rule 6. As we have already extracted, the Appellants' Company has evolved "PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWed IN GENERAL INSURANCE INDUSTRY FOR RECRUITMENT OF CLERICAL AND SUBORDINATE STAFF". Paragraph-16 of the Policy relates to the qualification and eligibility. Paragraph 16 (a)(1)(i) requires a graduation of a recognised University or pass in Higher Secondary with 60% marks (50% for Ex-servicemen, SC/ ST and physically handicapped candidates). Much reliance is placed on the certificate dated 27.1.1978 by the respondent to contend that the appointment was made only on the basis of the said certificate and as per Clause (4) of Rule 6 of the Rules. We have extracted the entire certificate in the earlier portion of the judgment. A perusal of the same reveals that it was issued for the purpose of promotion to the rank of Corporal. Note-1 of the said certificate refers to the fact that a pass in the Indian Air Force Educational Test shall be equated to Higher Secondary Examinations. Note-3 also refers that under Scheme 'A', which applies to airmen, who are matriculates or above, the pass standard is 50% marks in each subject. The appointment has been made only on the ground that the respondent has passed Higher Secondary examination with 50% of marks, by following paragraph-16(a)(1)(i) of the Policy for recruitment. Note-3 also refers that under Scheme 'A', which applies to airmen, who are matriculates or above, the pass standard is 50% marks in each subject. The appointment has been made only on the ground that the respondent has passed Higher Secondary examination with 50% of marks, by following paragraph-16(a)(1)(i) of the Policy for recruitment. When such appointment is made, the certificate is to be considered only for the entitlement of the respondent in seeking the appointment to the post of Assistant. When specific procedures are evolved by way of Policy for appointment and promotion, the said Policy alone shall be made applicable to the appointment by the appellants as Senior Assistant. The appointment shall be made only under paragraph-16 of the Policy. Merely because Rule-6 (4) of the Rules prescribes a graduation for the appointment to the post of Assistant, that cannot be taken advantage of by the respondent to contend that a pass in Higher Secondary with 50% of the mark shall be equated to a graduation. We absolutely see no merit in the said argument as the certificates dated 27.1.1978 and December 1992 do not in anywhere indicate the fact that a pass in H.S.C. is equivalent to graduation. 13. The next question to be considered is, the procedure to be followed by the Appellants' Company for drawing a panel for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant. We have already extracted paragraph-29 of the Policy, which relats to promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistant. It is a selection post. One of the mode for inclusion of panel is also to take into consideration of the marks awarded by the Assistants for their educational qualifications. Paragraph-39 of the Policy refers to the award of marks, which also we have extracted above. An Assistant with a qualification of Higher Secondary Certificate/Intermediate is awarded seven marks. The respondent was considered as an Assistant with a qualification of pass in Higher Secondary Certificate and was awarded marks accordingly. This award of marks is questioned again on the ground that the respondent should be considered as an Assistant with a Graduate qualification. For the reasons stated above, we have to come to the conclusion that by issuance of IAF Certificate, the Higher Secondary Certificate cannot be equated to graduation. This award of marks is questioned again on the ground that the respondent should be considered as an Assistant with a Graduate qualification. For the reasons stated above, we have to come to the conclusion that by issuance of IAF Certificate, the Higher Secondary Certificate cannot be equated to graduation. We find no merit in the grievance of the respondent to seek for an award of 12 marks for his educational qualification viz., a pass in H.S.C. 14. The next question falls for our consideration is, whether the relaxation given to the appointment to be extended to promotion also. As we have held that the appointment of the respondent itself is only on the basis of paragraph-16 of the Policy together with his qualification of H.S.C. with 50% of marks and he was not appointed with any relaxation as to the educational qualification, the question of applying any relaxation for the promotion to the post of Senior Assistant does not arise. Of course, by the Office Memorandum dated 14.10.1991 the relaxation to the appointment shall be also extended for promotion. But, in view of our finding that the respondent was appointed not by relaxation of educational qualification, but by virtue of the minimum educational qualification prescribed in paragraph-16 of the Policy for recruitment, the question of relaxation of educational qualification does not arise nor the office memorandum dated 14.10.1991 will have no application to the facts of this case. Even otherwise, it is to be noted that the respondent was, in fact, considered for promotion in the year 1993 as well as in the year 1994. It is not the grievance of the respondent that he was deprived of even consideration on the ground that he did not possess graduation. 15. Ultimately, the fact remains as to the entitlement of the respondent for award of mark either based on the Higher Secondary Certificate or the graduation. In view of our finding that the respondent is entitled to award of mark only on the basis of his Higher Secondary Certificate and not on the basis of graduation, we find every justification in the appellants Insurance Company in not promoting the respondent though he was included in the panel in the year 1993 and 1994 as he did not acquire the required cut off marks. In view of our finding, we are not inclined to accept the view taken by the learned Single Judge that the respondent was appointed by relaxing the educational qualification, while he was appointed on 1.11.1978 and the same relaxation should be extended for promotion also, as we have factually found that the respondent was in fact considered for promotion but not promoted in view of the fact that he did not secure the minimum cut off marks for limited number of cases. Even assuming that the relaxation is made applicable, the respondent cannot insist for an award of 12 marks contrary to paragraph-39 of the Policy. 16. For all the above reasons, we find no merit in the grievance of the respondent in seeking for award of 12 marks treating him as a graduate. Accordingly, the order of the learned Single Judge is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. We are informed that the respondent has been promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1998 in the routine course on the basis of his eligibility under paragraph-29 of the Policy. The respondent is entitled to the benefit of the said promotion.