V. SANKARAN AND ORS. Vs. THE MANAGEMENT OF THE INDIAN BANK REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five writ petitions challenge the selection and appointment of Respondents 2 to 4, who are common to all these writ petitions, as Assistant General Managers in the first Respondent -Bank. Affidavits counter -affidavits, reply affidavits, rejoinder affidavits and third party affidavits have been filed before this Court and Mr. A. Ramachandran, who appears for the Petitioners, sought to cover a very wide ground. However, in view of the very narrow compass within which we propose to dispose of these writ petitions, it is not necessary to go into all the contentions so vehemently put forward by Mr. A. Ramachandran in support of the case of the Petitioners in these writ petitions. We shall briefly refer to the facts in order to understand the point raised by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners. The Petitioners and Respondents 2 to 4 are officers of Grade I in the first Respondent -Bank, namely, the Indian Bank. It was stated that originally Grade I consisted of only two categories of officers, namely, Superintendents and Regional Managers, but subsequently taking into account, the stagnation in Grade II, the other officers, like Branch Managers, Inspectors of Branches and others, who were in Grade II were promoted and taken over to Grade I. It is not in dispute that an appointment as Assistant General Manager in the Bank has to be made from among the officers of Grade I. As far as the present controversy is concerned, the undisputed facts are that on 30th April, 1978, a committee consisting, among others, the Managing Director and the General Manager of the Bank, the latter of whom was stated to have taken the place of Secretary, which was prevalent before nationalisation of the Bank, examined the list of Grade I officers for the purpose of selecting three persons to be appointed as Assistant General Managers and unanimously recommended the names of Respondents 2 to 4 in these writ petitions, and that subsequently the Board of Directors on 14th June, 1978 met and selected those three officers and appointed them as Assistant General Managers in the existing grade of Rs. 1,500 - -75 - -1,950 - -50 - -2,000. It is the selection and appointment of these three persons that are challenged in the present writ petitions.

(2.) As we have pointed out already, several contentions were put forward in support of the writ petitions. But as the Petitioners are bound to succeed with reference to one contention, namely, that the selection and appointment of Respondents 2 to 4 were not in accordance with Rule 39 of the rules governing the service of officers in the Indian Bank, it is not necessary to go into the other controversies. Rule 39 of the Rules reads as follows:

(3.) Before proceeding further, we shall make a reference to the relevant provisions of Central Act V of 1970, namely, the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, in order to appreciate the status of the aforesaid Rule 39. Sec. 3(1) of this Act proceeded to state: