ORDER (Ujjal Bhuyan, J) 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.06.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 6098/2003 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant as the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer in the Electrical Wing of the Public Works Department of the State of Assam. Appellant had based his case by relying upon the provisions of the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978 and the Rules framed thereunder (Act and Rules hereafter). 2. Facts of the case may be briefly noticed at the outset. 3. Appellant was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the Public Works Department, Government of Assam on 28.09.1989. He was promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer on 03.07.1997. In the gradation list of officers in the rank of Assistant Executive Engineer as on 07.10.2002, appellant was placed at serial No. 14. At this stage, it may be pointed out that the petitioner is the only officer belonging to the Scheduled Tribe (Plains) appearing in the aforesaid gradation list. 4. A Selection Committee meeting was held on 20.06.2003 to consider promotion of eligible officers to the post of Executive Engineer. Altogether 6 vacancies for the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 2002 and 2003 were available for consideration by the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee considered the vacancies arising for each of the aforementioned years separately and prepared a year wise select list of eligible candidates. Following recommendation made by the Selection Committee, the appointing authority issued order dated 20.07.2003 appointing respondent Nos. 4 to 8 to the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) on promotion. 5. Petitioner was not recommended by the Selection Committee and consequently, his name did not figure in the order of promotion dated 20.07.2003. 6. Aggrieved, appellant filed WP(C) No. 6098/2003 before this Court questioning the legality and validity of the recommendations of the Selection Committee dated 20.06.2003 and the consequential promotion order dated 20.07.2003. 7. It was contended by the appellant before the writ Court that the post of Assistant Engineer was the feeder post for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. 6. Aggrieved, appellant filed WP(C) No. 6098/2003 before this Court questioning the legality and validity of the recommendations of the Selection Committee dated 20.06.2003 and the consequential promotion order dated 20.07.2003. 7. It was contended by the appellant before the writ Court that the post of Assistant Engineer was the feeder post for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. However, during the hearing of the writ petition, it transpired that the relevant Service Rules i.e. the Assam Engineering (Public Works Department) Service Rules, 1978 (Service Rules hereafter) was amended in the year 1986 creating the intermediary post of Assistant Executive Engineer between the posts of Assistant Engineer and Executive Engineer. The post of Assistant Engineer was made the feeder post for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, which in turn was made the feeder post for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. Rendering of a minimum continuous service in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer for a period of 5 years on the first January of the year of promotion is the prescribed eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. 8. In view of the aforesaid development, appellant gave up his challenge to the selection process and consequential promotion relatable to the years 1996, 1997 and 1998 as he did not have the required eligibility for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer for the vacancies arising in those years. Thus, the challenge was limited to the vacancies which arose in the years 2002 and 2003 by which time the appellant had completed the required length of service in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. 9. The argument that was advanced on behalf of the appellant was that he was entitled to accelerated promotion on the strength of the Act and the Rules, which provides for reservation in the matter of promotion. It was contended that on a reading of section 5 of the Act and the 20 point roster provided in the schedule to the Act, a reserved category candidate, once eligible for promotion, his name must be forwarded to the Selection Committee regardless of his inter- se seniority by preparing a separate list of reserved category candidates. Zone of consideration has to be formulated in a manner which would enable eligible reserved category candidates to a consideration for promotion. 10. Zone of consideration has to be formulated in a manner which would enable eligible reserved category candidates to a consideration for promotion. 10. Contention advanced on behalf of the appellant was resisted by the Public Works Department. It was contended that under Rule 13 (2) of the Service Rules, the appointing authority has to forward to the Selection Committee a list of officers to be considered for promotion. The list to be so forwarded should contain as many number of officers as four times the number of vacancies, which has to be prepared in order of seniority from amongst the eligible officers. Since the appellant’s seniority position was 14 in the gradation list, obviously he did not come within the zone of consideration for the solitary vacancy for each of the two years. As he did not come within the zone of consideration, question of consideration of the case of the appellant did not arise. 11. Learned Single Judge on due consideration negated the contention of the appellant and dismissed the writ petition. 12. Hence this appeal. 13. Heard Mr. P. K. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. I. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department for the respondents. 14. Learned counsel for the parties have argued more or less on similar lines as was argued before the Single Bench. In such circumstances, we do not feel it necessary to narrate in detail the arguments advanced on behalf of the rival parties. 15. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar. 16. Before proceeding further, relevant portion of the order of the learned Single Judge is quoted hereunder:- “Under the provisions of Rule 2 (c) of the Reservation Rules, candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes eligible for consideration for accelerated promotion would be such candidates who come within the zone of consideration and whose names appear in the list of candidates forwarded by the department to the Selection Board in accordance with the relevant Service Rules. Rule 5 which appear to mandate a separate selection process for reserved category candidates including preparation of separate select list for such candidates, opens with the provisions contained in sub-Rule (1) which requires consideration by the Selection Committee/Board, the cases of such candidates whose names have been forwarded in accordance with the provisions of the Service Rules. Rule 5 which appear to mandate a separate selection process for reserved category candidates including preparation of separate select list for such candidates, opens with the provisions contained in sub-Rule (1) which requires consideration by the Selection Committee/Board, the cases of such candidates whose names have been forwarded in accordance with the provisions of the Service Rules. The provisions contained in the later sub-Rules of Rule 5 with regard to preparation of separate select lists for reserved category candidates, naturally, has to be understood to be subject to the first requirement contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 i.e. that a reserved category candidate is included in the list of candidates which is to be forwarded to the Selection Board in accordance with the Service Rules. Turning to the relevant provisions of the Service Rules what this Court finds is that while Rule 12 prescribes the eligibility, Rule 13 (2) restricts the size of the list of candidates to four times the number of vacancies and in determining the said size i.e. in preparing the list of candidates to be forwarded, what is required to be done by the appointing authority is to draw up the list in order of seniority subject to eligibility of the candidates. An eligible candidate cannot insist on the inclusion of his name in the list to be forwarded to the Selection Board merely by virtue of his eligibility if, otherwise, his name cannot be included in terms of his inter se seniority. There is no provision in the Service Rules providing for forwarding a separate list of eligible candidates belonging to all or any of the reserved category candidates. The position that, therefore, emerges from a consideration of Rules 12 and 13 of the Service Rules in force is that all candidates whose cases are to be considered by the Selection Board must come within the zone of consideration in terms of their seniority and eligibility and not mere eligibility. Thereafter, promotions are to be made from the select list prepared and in the event a reserved category candidate finds his name included in the select list and a reserved post is available, such reserved category candidate has to be given the promotion against the reserved post in preference to the general category candidates who may be placed higher in the select list. The aforesaid is the scope, extent and ambit of reservation in promotional posts or the pace of accelerated promotions that is contemplated by the Service Rules and the Reservation Act and the Rules as in force. Reservation is essentially a matter of Government policy and the scope and extent of such reservation has to be determined by the State. What Article 16(4-A) provides is that in case the State adopts a policy for providing reservation in promotions and makes provisions in that regard, the same would be constitutionally permissible and withstand the test of reasonable classification. 8. The service Rules in force not having provided for sending the name of a reserved category candidate on the basis of his mere eligibility and the said provisions having rather contemplated that the list of names to be sent is to be drawn up on the basis of inter se seniority, the pace of accelerated promotion adopted by the department in the present case must be understood to be in conformity with the provisions of the Service Rules read with the Reservation Act and the Rules. The claim made by the petitioner that being the only eligible candidate his name ought to have been sent to the Selection Board dehors his inter se seniority, vis-à-vis the general category candidates, therefore, cannot be accepted by the Court. The inevitable conclusion that has to be reached on the aforesaid facts is that there is no discernible illegality or infirmity in the selection held and the consequential promotions made. 9. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the selection held and the consequential promotions made which would require interference of the Court. Consequently, this writ petition has to be held to be without merit or substance. It is accordingly dismissed. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost.” 17. The line of reasoning adopted by the learned Single Judge, as referred to above, appears to us to be the correct one and we are not inclined to take a different view of the matter. It is accordingly dismissed. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost.” 17. The line of reasoning adopted by the learned Single Judge, as referred to above, appears to us to be the correct one and we are not inclined to take a different view of the matter. We agree with the views expressed by the learned Single Judge that from a conjoint reading of the relevant provisions of the Service Rules and the Reservation Act and the Rules, it becomes abundantly clear that a reserved category candidate to claim accelerated promotion on the strength of reservation in promotion must first find place in the zone of consideration as prescribed under the Service Rules, which is four times the number of the vacancies being considered on the basis of inter se seniority. Unless and until he comes within the zone of consideration in the manner prescribed, i.e., on the basis of inter se seniority, a reserved category candidate cannot claim the benefit of reservation to seek accelerated promotion. Since the appellant did not come within the zone of consideration for the solitary vacancy arising in each of the years 2002 and 2003, he was not entitled to a consideration for promotion against the said vacancies. 18. In view of above, we find no merit in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed. 19. However, notwithstanding the above, we would like to observe that dismissal of this appeal will be no bar to consider the case of the appellant for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer as and when he comes within the zone of consideration as per the Service Rules whereafter he can claim the benefit of the Reservation Act and Rules, provided a reserved vacancy for the Scheduled Tribe (Plains) is available as per roster. 20. No cost.