Re-designation - Working in a Central Public Sector Enterprise

Working in a Central Public Sector Enterprise.
Grades and Designations of below-board level positions are like:
E1-Subjunior Manager
E2- Junior Manager
E3- Assistant Manager
E4-Deputy Manager
E5-Manager
E6-Senior Manager
E7-Deputy General Manager (DGM)
E8- Additional General Manager (AGM)
E8- General Manager (GM)
E8- Chief General manager (CGM)
E9- Executive Director (ED)
Pay-scales are different in different grades. In E8 grade there are 3 designations (AGM, GM, CGM) with the same DPE pay scale but different benefits. In the organization one enters the E8 grade with designation as AGM. Then through a selection procedure company chooses some AGMs as GMs. Through another selection procedure company chooses some GMs as CGMs. Organization alters the seniority in E8 grade by ignoring the date of entry in E8 grade and considers CGM as senior to GM and GM as senior to AGM. Only CGMs are considered for entry into E9 grade.
Company does this by saying it has got the power of doing "Re-designation of Posts" without effecting "Promotion". Is this "re-designation of post" in true sense? As it alters the seniority, provides CGM with more administrative and financial powers than GM and provides GM with more administrative and financial powers than AGM. Can it be termed as "Re-designation of Post" as many of his/ her colleagues who are/were in the same post with same seniority before his/ her re-designation are now junior to him/ her. How will this be "Re-designation of Post" as for the same post- someone by virtue of his/her new designation become senior to some one having old designation for the same post?

First of all you should examine whether your HR Manual provide for such of 'out-of-turn' pick & choose selection for elevating a handful of employees mostly known to be in 'good book' or thru' some favoritism. While doing so it'll, no doubt create 'anomaly' due to hitherto junior becomes 'seniors' overnight. Some in upper hierarchy might say this is possible by a selection process of 'merit-cum-seniority' which may be possible for senior positions advocating 'merit' shall be the deciding factor rather than 'seniority'. Some may use arguments such as 'without' effecting their emoluments and so on. These are the games being played by seniors to push their agenda by any means.

They term the process as "Re-designation of post"and not "Promotion". My query is- if there are 2 persons in the same post and one is re-designated with a new designation (treated higher than the old designation) and the other is retained with the old designation how can the process be "re-designation of post". Because, now the same post (as re-designation of the post has happened without actual change in the post) has 2 designations with different seniority.
I can say this is violation of "re-designation of post".

Hi friend,
As you know, when a post is created in the HR Manual/Manpower strength it's obvious it's tagged on with Name of designation, scale of pay and other JD/responsibilities etc. That being so, simply re-designation cannot be ward-off any anomalies to the incumbents both existing and recruits. If it's happening for entire cadre applicable to all existing & future recruits there won't be any problem. For e.g., E1 'Sub Junior' redesignated as E1-Junior Manager/Engineer. Whereas,especially, when a re-designation taking place applicable only to handpicked person(s) there appears certain anomaly for others in the very same cadre. In such situations the affected have to cause re-dressal at right time, in advance i.e. before implementation, if possible to safe guard own interest.