Kerala High Court backs KMRL decision to award lesser marks to candidates with distance degrees when deciding promotions

The Kerala High Court recently upheld the decision of Kochi Metro Rail Limited's (KMRL) to award lesser marks to a candidate with distance education degree while evaluating her and other candidates for promotion to higher posts [Baybin J Korah v Kerala Metro Rail Ltd].

Justice N Nagaresh observed that there was no illegality in KMRL's allotment of lesser marks to the candidate or its discretion to differentiate between regular and distance education qualifications, because while considering candidates for promotion, the company was well within its policy framework to prescribe qualification criteria and evaluation norms, deigned to select the best suited candidates for a position.

"In the matter of promotion to higher post, the employer will be at liberty to select the best of the candidates taking into consideration the educational qualification as well as the experience and assign different marks based on the stipulated criteria," the Court ruled.

It further clarified that even though KMRL allowed employees with distance qualifications to be considered for promotion, it did not mandate awarding them equal marks.

"The relaxation granted to the employees of KMRL making them eligible would not ipso facto give them a right to equal marks in comparison to those employees/ candidates, who have obtained educational qualification in regular mode," the Court said.

Thus, it dismissed a petition filed by an employee challenging KMRL's decision to promote five other employees as Deputy General Managers (DGMs) instead of her and awarding lesser marks to her due to her distance education degree.

The dispute arose after KMRL promoted 5 candidates to the post of Deputy General Manager in December 2023 and rejected one Baybin J Korah's request to reconsider her for the promotion.

Korah was wgrkinf as a manager at KMRL and holds an MSc in Physics and two MBA's.

She claimed that her superior qualifications were ignored while deciding on the promotions and she was unfairly awarded fewer marks due to her MBA degrees being obtained through distance education.

She stated that she could not be treated as inferior to regular mode MBAs, as she met all eligibility criteria and performed well in the interview.

She pointed out that the company awarded her only 15 out of 20 marks for her educational qualifications due to her distance degree, which lowered her overall ranking below other candidates.

Korah relied on an internal memorandum issued by the Managing Director of KMRL in June 2023 which said that employees who had joined KMRL through direct recruitment with distance or part-time qualifications recognised by AICTE or UGC would be eligible for promotion up to just below Head of Department (HOD) level.

She argued that this relaxation equated her distance education MBA to a regular one.

However, the Court rejected her contention and explained that though the internal memorandum allowed employees with distance qualifications to be considered for promotion, it did not mandate awarding them equal marks.

It further noted that as per KMRL's promotion policy, full marks (20) were reserved only for candidates possessing qualifications as per the prescribed entry-level standard, while those one level below or candidates having obtained their degrees through non-regular modes would be given 15 marks.

Thus, finding no illegality in KMRL's assessment, the Court dismissed her petition.

Advocate SP Aravindakshan Pillay appeared for the petitioner.

Standing Counsel Antony Mukkath appeared for KMRL

Advocate John Nellimala Sarai represented the 5 employees who were promoted.

[Read Judgment]