suitability' was to be used for giving promotion to the post of Assistant. The submissions for petitioners that there could not have been bench mark is not acceptable. The learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the term 'suitability' indirectly would mean 'merit' if bench mark is fixed and so, the bench mark ought not to have been fixed. This proposition is not acceptable. The term 'suitability' means suitability for particular post on which promotion is to be given. For that the employer can fix the bench mark. In the present matter, the employees who had participated in the process were to achieve the bench mark which was 25 marks out of 50 marks. Out of 50 marks, 20 marks were kept for oral interview, 25 marks were kept for ACRs of last five years and 5 marks were kept for Special Report. On the basis of gradation, marks were given for ACRs of relevant period. All the employees who had participated in the process got equal marks viz. 5 marks for Special Report. It is not disputed that present petitioners could not achieve the marks fixed as bench mark in oral interview and ACRs. The totalling of all the marks was to be done and this total ought to have been 25 or more than 25. In view of that procedure adopted, which was transperent, it cannot be said that the petitioners suffered adversely due to aforesaid procedure. To no candidate who had participated in the
