REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

YOGENDRA RAI Appellant

V/S

ADHYAKSHA BASTI GRAMIN BANK BASTI Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SADI LAL V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,GURGAON AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SYNDICATE BANK SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (REGD.) AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
GOVIND RAM PUROHIT AND ANOTHER V. JAGJIWAN CHANDRA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR VERMA V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. DURGA CHARAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
SANT RAM SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. MOHAN LAL KAPOOR:K N MISRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. N M THOMAS [REFERRED TO]
G SARANA VS. UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR CHANDRA BHAN SINGH VS. LATAFAT ULLAH KHAN [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA VS. AKHILESH KUMAR SHUKLA [REFERRED TO]
MADANLAL VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
JAGATHIGOWDA C N VS. CHAIRMAN CAUVERY GRAMINA BANK [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. N CHANDRASEKHARAN [REFERRED TO]
B V SIVAIAH VS. K ADDANKT BABU [REFERRED TO]
UTKAL UNIVERSITY VS. NRUSINGHA CHARAN SARANGI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. LT GEN RAJENDRA SINGH KADYAN [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL COUNCIL FOR RESEARCH IN AYURVEDA AND SIDDHA VS. K SANTHAKUMARI [REFERRED TO]
BIBHUDATTA MOHANTY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K SAMANTARAY VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. JALAL UDDIN [REFERRED TO]
HARIGOVIND YADAV VS. REWA SIDHI GRAMIN BANK [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA VS. SAMYUKT KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DR. B. S. Chauhan, J. This writ petition has been filed for quash ing the promotion list dated 23. 9. 2000 (Annex. 4) insofar as it promotes respon dent Nos. 3 to 5 and ignores the claim of the petitioner, and also for quashing the impugned Circular dated 16. 3. 2000 (Annex. 2) providing for a minimum bench mark for the assessment of minimum merit.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3 to 5 held the post of Scale-l Officer in the respon dent Bank. All of them being eligible for promotion to the post of Scale-ll Officer were considered. However, the said respondent Nos. 3 to 5 have been promoted though they were admittedly junior to the petitioner. Petitioner has been non suited as he failed to secure the 70% benchmark as provided under the Circular dated 16. 3. 2000.

(3.) THE petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3 to 5 were assessed in the year 2000. Petitioner could secure only 46. 45 marks so far as his performance ap praisal for three years was concerned. He was awarded 12 marks in interview and, thus, could obtain a total of 58. 45 marks only. Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 secured more than 70 marks as fixed under the Circular. As the petitioner miser ably failed to achieve the said benchmark, he was not promoted.

Click here to view full judgment.

YOGENDRA RAI Vs. ADHYAKSHA BASTI GRAMIN BANK BASTI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address