SURENDRA SINGH PARMAR Vs. ALAKNANDA GRAMIN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAFULLA C. Pant, J. By means of above three writ petitions, the petitioners who are Scale I officers, have challenged the selection process for promotions to Scale II in the Alaknanda Gramin Bank Ltd. , Pauri Garhwal, for its vari ous branches in Uttaranchal.

(2.) WE heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

(3.) NEXT case on which the peti tioners heavily relied is B. V. Sivaiah Vs. K. Addanki Babu (1998) 6 Su preme Court Cases 720. Though this case also pertains to the promotion prior to the period of enforcement of 1998 Rules but expression "seniority Cum Merit" has been explained in said case, whereby it has been made clear that once the bench mark is cleared by a candidate for promotion the senior, even if secured lesser marks in merit, would be promoted first. The relevant para of aforesaid judgment is being quoted below : "we thus arrive at the conclusion that the criterion of 'seniority-cum-merit' in the matter of promotion postulates that given the minimum necessary merit requisite for effi ciency of administration, the sen ior, even though less meritorious, shall have priority and a compara tive assessment of merit is not re quired to be made. For assessing the minimum necessary merit, the competent authority can lay down the minimum standard that is re quired and also prescribe the mode of assessment of merit of the employee who is eligible for consideration for promotion. Such assessment can be made by as signing marks on the basis of ap praisal of performance on the ba sis of service record and interview and prescribing the minimum marks which would entitle a per son to be promoted on the basis of seniority cum merit. "