INDIAN BANK Vs. R JAYASREE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. E. Subramani, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Anand, learned counsel for the second respondent and Mr. Grashious Kuriakose, learned counsel for the impleaded party.

(2.) The writ appeal is directed against the judgment in O.P. No. 6138 of 1997, dated 11th November, 1997. The second respondent by a notification dated 28.6.1995 invited applications among others for the post of Clerk cum Cashier, Typist cum Clerk (English) and Stenographer (English) from among eligible candidates in respect of vacancies likely to arise during the year 1995 - 96 in the Public Sector Banks in the State of Kerala, Mahe and Union Territories of Lakshadweep. Ist respondent, Jayasree, was one of the applicants. According to her, after a process of selection, which included a written test, a skilled test and an interview, she was included in Ext. P1 select list prepared by the 2nd respondent - the Banking Service Recruitment Board. According to the 1st respondent, she was included in the wait list for the post of Clerk cum Cashier with rank No. 15 in the general category and as serial No. 9 in the general category for the post of Typist cum Clerk (English). It is her case that the said list was to remain valid for one year from 23.4.1996 or till the finalisation of the next recruitment result, whichever is earlier. 15 candidates from the main list have been offered for appointment in the services of the appellants pursuant to the requisition made by the appellants. One out of 15 candidates offered appointment did not accept the said appointment and join duty and that the said non joining duty vacancy was not reported to the 2nd respondent by the appellants.

(3.) The first respondent on the premise that had only the said non joining duty vacancy been reported by the appellants to the Banking Service Recruitment Board, the first respondent, 15th candidate in the waiting list for Clerk cum Cashier would have certainly been advised by the Recruitment Board leading eventually for her appointment as Clerk cum Cashier in the services of the appellants. She also alleged that consequent on the termination of the service of Smt T. Remadevi in the year 1996, there is a vacancy available in the service of M/s. Union Bank of India and that the second respondent has not, despite such vacancy being reported to it, furnished the name of any candidate for appointment against such vacancy and that the first respondent could have been offered appointment to such vacancy. She therefore, filed O.P. No. 6138 of 1997 with the following prayers: