DHARMENDRA KUMAR Vs. BANKING SERVICE RECRUITMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An advertisement was issued by the respondent Board for recruitment to various posts including the post of Probationary Officer in the Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra. It was stated in the advertisement that the total number of vacancies for the post of Probationary Officer was 100. A note was also appended to the advertisement which stated that the number of vacancies including the reserved vacancies mentioned in the advertisement were merely provisional and may vary according to the actual requirement of the Banks. The said advertisement was issued by the respondent pursuant to the indents placed by the Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra on the respondent Board that they proposed to appoint 50 Probationary Officers each in their Banks. The details of the proposed vacancies were also mentioned in the said advertisement which was issued pursuant to the indents placed by the said two Banks.

(2.) In response to the aforesaid advertisement a number of candidates including the petitioner submitted their applications to the respondent Board for recruitmeiit against the advertised vacancies. A written test was held by the respondent and a merit list was prepared of the successful candidates in the said written examination in which the name of the petitioner was placed at Serial No. 194 of the merit list. On the basis of his position in the merit list a provisional call letter dated 17.11.1999 was issued to the petitioner advising him to appear for interview. Similar call letters were issued to those candidates who were successful in the written test and eligible to be called for the interview. In the said call letter it was clearly stated that the said letter did not constitute an offer of employment. In. the general category to which the petitioner also belongs, interview call letters were issued to 245 candidates against 59 vacancies. The Bank of India, in the meantime sent a communication dated 22.11.1999 to the respondent Board not to go ahead with the recruitment process pursuant to their indent of 50 Probationary Officers as the Bank had taken a decision of making no recruitment for the present. In view of the aforesaid position the vacancies of the Probationary Officers stood reduced from 100 to 50. But by the time the aforesaid communication was received from the Bank of India provisional call letters for interview had already been issued to 408 provisionally eligible candidates out of which 245 candidates were of the general category. In the aforesaid circumstances the respondent Board went ahead with the interview programme as scheduled despite the fact that the number of vacancies stood reduced from 100 to 50 and on the basis of the selection process the Board prepared a list of successful candidates merit-wise of the candidates of the reserved category and also of the general category which was forwarded to the Bank of Maharashtra as per their requirement.

(3.) Before the final results were published the respondent Board released an announcement on 1.2.2000 in the newspapers intimating the reduction in the number of vacancies due to cancellation of indent for 50 Probationary Officers by Bank of India. In view of the said position the number of vacancies got reduced from 100 to 50 made up of 34 vacancies in the general category and 16 vacancies in the reserved category as against 59 posts in the general category and 41 posts in the reserved category. In the final merit list, after interview the name of the petitioner was at No. 163 in the order of merit, and therefore, the petitioner who belongs to the general category had no chance of being appointed. The Bank of Maharashtra also completed the process of appointment of candidates/officers as required by them.