B SESHAGIRI RAO Vs. STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The method of selection adopted by the State Bank of Hyderabad in the matter of promotions from Grade-I to Grade-A is at issue in this appeal preferred by the unsuccessful petitioner in W.P. No. 986 of 1980.

(2.) The State Bank of Hyderabad effected certain promotions between 2/12/1978 and 24/09/1979 to Grade-A based upon the promotion policy evolved on 7/01/1976 and 9/03/1977. Challenging the same W.P. No. 1434 of 1977 was filed in this court which was allowed on 4/11/1978 as a consequence of which all the promotions made during the above period were set aside. Thereafter an interim promotion policy was devised by the State Bank of Hyderabad as a consequence of which 17 promotions were effected on 2/12/1978, one promotion on 24/09/1979 and 17 promotions on 9/08/1979. Assailing the above promotions, W.P. No. 986 of 1980 was filed by the appellant herein from out of which the present appeal arose.

(3.) The persons who were promoted between 2/12/1978 and 24/09/1979 were impleaded as respondents 3 to 52 in the writ petition. The case of the appellant in the writ petition was that the promotions were based solely on the basis of the performance of the candidates in the interview and the selections so made are arbitrary, being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. There cannot be a valid selection for performance in the interview regardless of the record of service. The interim promotion policy which was said to be the foundation for effecting the promotions was assailed on the ground that it was irrational. Another point taken was that in the absence of any Rules or Regulations governing promotion to higher post, the Bank was not entitled to make any promotions by resorting to an interim promotion policy. The stand taken by the Bank was that the record of service of the officers was also looked into and the appraisal was made regarding suitability or otherwise keeping in view the performance of the candidates in the interview. The Selection Committee which consisted of very senior officers had taken into consideration the potentialities of the candidates for discharging higher duties as reflected in the assessment made at the time of interview. The mere fact that a candidate has earned a good rating while discharging duties in the lower post by itself is not a reliable factor for judging the suitability to discharge higher responsibilities. There cannot be any mathematical formula as to the method to be followed in the interview; depending upon the exigencies of the service, the requirements of the administration and the potentialities of the candidates as assessed by the Selection Committee, decisions will have to be taken. The impoderables that entered into the selection process cannot be predicted by any discernible ratio.