CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER SBI Vs. P CHANDRA SEKHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the respondents in the Writ Petition No.16984 of 1988. The writ appeal was brought under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, aggrieved by the judgment of the learned single Judge in the above writ petition. Learned single Judge issued writ of mandamus directing the respondents-appellants to promote the petitioner-respondent to the post of Middle Management Grade Scale-II (for short 'MMG-II') with retrospective effect with all consequential benefits.

(2.) The following few facts need to be noticed: The petitioner-respondent was appointed as Rural Development Officer in the Junior Management Grade in State Bank of India in the year 1979. Since he was eligible for promotion to the post of MMG-II, he was called for interview for consideration for promotion under merit channel. He was interviewed by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, 'D.P.C'), on 31-7-1986. It was alleged in his affidavit that the petitioner was successful in the interview and that he was included in the promotion panel and that it was sent to the Head Office for approval. His name was also found in the list published by the Officers Federation at Sl.No.99. However, the petitioner-respondent was not given promotion even though many persons included in the selection panel were promoted w.e.f. 1-8-1985. The petitioner-respondent was again called to appear for interview in 1988, for promotion to the same post. The grievance of the petitioner was that he was already selected for promotion and the question of again appearing for interview should not arise and that the authorities without any good reason, were withholding his promotion. He, therefore, refused to attend the interview. He approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to promote him as MMG-II w.e.f. 1-8-1985 in pursuance of the interview held on 31-7-1986. The respondent-appellant resisted the claim of the petitioner stating that serious irregularities were alleged against the petitioner in discharge of his duties as Rural Development Officer and the matter was investigated by the Bank and a prima facie case was found against him. In fact, the petitioner-respondent was suspended, however, he evaded service of the same but succeeded in filing W.P.No. 11733 of 1987 and obtaining an interim order from this Court suspending the order of suspension. The petitioner was, therefore, continuing in service by virtue of the interim order pending the writ petition. A case was also registered by C.B.I, on 4-8-1987 against the respondent under Sections 420. 467, 471, 477-A of Indian Penal Code, read with Secs.5(2) and 5(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act and took up for investigation. It was specifically averred that only after promotion panel was prepared, the above irregularities have come to light and since the case was under investigation by C.B.I., the petitioner was not considered for promotion as per the promotion panel. He was accordingly called for interview by the next D.P.C., in the year 1988, to take appropriate action.

(3.) Learned single Judge, on the above pleadings, held that though sealed cover procedure was applicable to the employees of the Bank, since no charge-memo has been issued or charge-sheet has been filed, on the date of the consideration for promotion i.e., on 31-7-1986, the petitioner-respondent was entitled for promotion along with his juniors and the action of the appellant- Bank, in not granting promotion to him, was found unlawful. Accordingly, the learned Judge directed the Bank to promote the petitioner w.e.f. 1-8-1985.