P S GEETA Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions are for the the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order against the Central Bank of India and its Divisional Manager to consider the applications of the petitioners for appointment to the post of clerks and other subordinate staff in the Central Bank of India on the basis of the written test held on 19th October, 1975 and as per circular dated 6th May, 1968.

(2.) The petitioners are the children of the employees in the Central Bank of India which is a banking company acquired under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. In exercise of the power vested in the said bank, among others, circular dated 6th May, 1968 was issued to govern recruitment to the posts of clerks and other subordinate staff. By virtue of section 19 (3) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transferof Undertakings) Act, 1970, the said circular continues to be in forceand govern the recruitment to the posts. In accordance with that circular applications were called for in the prescribed form from all those who fulfil the prescribed age and educational qualifications. In the case of the children of the employees of the bank, these qualifications were relaxed and certain percentage of posts were also reserved. The Rules regarding recruitment of staff in so far as they are relevant for our purpose read as follows :-

(3.) The petitioners herein claiming to be entitled to the concessions afforded under the above said Rules, applied for the posts and took the written test on 19th January, 1975. It is the case of the petitioners that the 1st respondent called for interviews of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Ex-Servicemen and dependants of those killed in action, and after making the selection from amongst them, appointed them in the permanent vacancies. But so far as the petitioners herein and other candidates who belong to the category of children of the employees of the bank are concerned, they were not called for interview and none of them were appointed to any post. The petitioners who are already working on a temporary basis have all worked for not less than 240 days during a period of 12 months. While so, the respondents have published an advertisement in the daily newspapers on 5th May, 1977 calling for applications for appointment to the posts of clerks and other subordinate staff and for this purpose, written test was also being conducted on 3rd July, 1977. From the Rules of recruitment advertised it would appear that no posts have been reserved in favour of the children of the employees of the bank which is contrary to the circular referred to above and also the existing practice. The petitioners state that while they were within the age limit when they applied for the posts sought to be filled up in pursuance of the circular dated 6th May, 1968 they are now above the age limit and are not qualified to apply for the posts now advertised. It is contended that without declaring the result of the previous test, the respondents are not entitled to call for fresh applications and take appointments. The petitioners claim that as per the Rules governing the appointment to the posts of clerks and subordinate staff in force on the date of the circular, 6th May, 1968, they are entitled to be appointed on the basis of the results of the written test and interview that are to be held in accordance With that circular. They therefore seek a writ of mandamus as stated above.