1.There is no provision in the Staff Regulations either for the regrading of a post or for the reclassification of an official as such ( see the judgment of 6 May 1969 in Case 21/68 Huybrechts v Commission (( 1969 )) ECR 85 ).
2.The essential purpose of a vacancy notice is to give those interested the most accurate information possible about the conditions of eligibility for the post to enable them to judge whether they should apply for it ( see the judgment of 30 October 1974 in Case 188/73 Grassi v Council (( 1974 )) ECR 1099 ).
3.The comparative examination of the merits of candidates for A 3 posts, may, in view of their nature and importance, be properly conducted without taking account of the area of activities in which the duties connected with those posts must be performed and by taking into consideration solely the specific qualities of the candidates and in particular their ability to direct a large administrative unit, where the vacancy notices for the post do not require the candidates to have specific qualifications in the area of activities covered by the provisions concerned .
4.Reasons for promotion decisions are not required to be given either to the officials promoted, whom they cannot adversely affect, nor to candidates not promoted, who might be harmed by such a statement of reasons ( see the judgment of 16 December 1987 in Case 111/86 Delauche v Commission (( 1987 )) ECR 5345 ).
5.In accordance with consistent case-law, the appointing authority has a wide power of appraisal as regards the comparative examination of the respective merits of officials who are eligible for promotion and the Court must limit its review to the question whether the appointing authority has used its power in a manifestly erroneous manner .
In Case C-81/88
Helmut Muellers, an official of the Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities, represented and assisted by Edmond Lebrun, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of T . Biever, 83, boulevard Grande-Duchesse Charlotte,
applicant,
v
Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities, represented by its Legal Adviser, Mr Bruggeman and by D . Lagasse, of the Brussels Bar, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of the Commission' s Legal Department, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,
defendant,
APPLICATION for the annulment of the following decisions of the Bureau of the Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities concerning the filling of the vacant post of Head of the Transport and Communications Division, Directorate B ( Vacancy Notice No 46/87 ):
( a)the decision adopted on 29 June 1987 to select two candidates to fill two of the three vacant posts of Head of Division, including the post at issue, by means of internal promotion,
( b)the decision adopted on 30 June 1987 to propose that the Council of the European Communities should appoint one of those two candidates to the post at issue,
( c)the decision notified by letter of 13 July 1987 not to accept the applicant' s candidature for that post,
and also the annulment of :
( d ) the decision of the Council of the European Communities of 3 December 1987 promoting the proposed candidate to Grade A 3 and appointing him Head of the Transport and Communications Division in Directorate B of the General Secretariat of the Economic and Social Committee with effect from 1 August 1987,
( e ) the decision of the Chairman of the Economic and Social Committee of 15 December 1987 transferring the applicant to the section for energy, nuclear questions and research in Directorate C,
( f)the express decision rejecting his complaint notified to him by letter of 18 December 1987,
THE COURT ( Third Chamber )
composed of : M . Zuleeg, President of Chamber, J . C . Moitinho de Almeida and F . Grévisse, Judges,
hereby :
( 1)Dismisses the application;
( 2 ) Orders each party to bear its own costs .
