K SOMU Vs. DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE; ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, SALEM; ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, NAMAKKAL; SALEM DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the above writ petition for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the fourth respondent to consider the appointment of the petitioner as an Assistant in the fourth respondent Bank in Salem District with retrospective effect from the date the fourth respondent made appointments to the post of Assistants based on the list called for from the Employment Exchange at Namakkal and Salem in February 2001.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he belongs to the backward community and possessed Bachelors Degree in B.A., and Diploma in Co-operation and Bachelor of Law Degree. He registered his Diploma in Co-operation in the year 1989 and his Bachelors degree in the year 1998 with the Employment Exchange at Salem. The fourth respondent-Salem Central Co-operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) decided to fill up 142 vacancies in the post of Assistant in various branches of the Bank. The Bank has called for list of candidates from the Employment Exchange Offices at Namakkal and Salem in February, 2001. After bifurcation of the Salem District into Salem District and Namakkal District, the petitioner's name was transferred to Employment Exchange Office at Namakkal. The petitioner had registered his B.A. Degree with the Employment Exchange on 27.02.1990. The Salem Employment Exchange has sent names in the ratio of 1:5 (5 candidates for 1 vacancy). The petitioner's name was also forwarded to the Bank. It appears that the second and third respondents had not sent the list in the ratio of 1:1. Because of the irregularity, the said list was cancelled by respondents 2 and 3. Thereafter, he came to know that both the Salem and Namakkal Employment Exchanges have been asked to sponsor the names of candidates for the posts of Assistant having degree with Diploma in Co-operation qualification. He verified that even this time his name was not sponsored by the Namkkal and Salem Employment Exchanges. Respondents 2 and 3 have made a grave mistake, taking into consideration of only the date on which the candidate has qualified and registered his diploma in Co-operation. The petitioner has completed 35 years and would become ineligible for appointment to the post thereafter as he will be over-aged. Though his name was sponsored for the post of Assistant Manager in the year 1993, in 2001, his name was not forwarded. Aggrieved by the same and having no other remedy, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for issuance of appropriate direction.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent it is specifically stated that the name of the petitioner was not sent by the Employment Exchange, hence he was not considered for appointment in the Bank.