PRAKASH KUMAR ROUT Vs. DHENKANAL GRAMYA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioners in all the three writ applications who were promoted and working as Field Supervisors, having been reverted to the post of Senior Clerk cum Cashier, have challenged the order of reversion passed by the Chairman, Dhenkanal Gramya Bank (opp. party No.l) dated 14.1.1995. After discussing the facts and circumstances, the Hon'ble Court held :

(2.) IN view of the pleadings of the parties and the submissions made at the Bar the main question that needs consideration is as to whether the petitioners who are promoted to the post of Field Supervisors in view of the selection made on the basis of seniority cum merit, copy of which has been annexed to the writ application as Annexure 3 forwarded by letter under Annexure 2 dated 25.10.1990, the petitioners could have been reverted to their former post of Senior Clerk cum Cashier in terms of the judgment of this Court in O.J. C. No. 1477 of 1991 and Ors. This Court in O.J.C. No. 1477 of 1991 which was followed in the other two writ applications while repelling the contentions of the Bank that the principle of seniority cum merit for promotion, the NABARD guidelines have been given a go by in view of the statutory Rules in terms of the finding that the order specifically indicates that the promotion to the post of Field Supervisor is on the basis of seniority cum merit. It was found that the statutory Rules nowhere indicate that the mode for promotion would be the basis of merit alone. Normally when a promotion is made applying the principle of seniority cum merit, seniority plays a vital role and unless and until the senior employee is found unsuitable while judging his merit there was no justification for ignoring his case for promotion. On going through the provisions contained in the Rule as well as the order, the Court held that the petitioners therein have been kept out of promotion by assigning them the place lower than their juniors after adjudging them suitable for promotion. Having so held the Court quashed the position that had been assigned to the petitioners in the list of persons found suitable for promotion and directed that the petitioners therein should be promoted to the post of Field Supervisors from the date, their juniors have been promoted. The relevant portion of the judgment at paragraph 4 may be quoted hereunder for clarity :

(3.) IN such view of the matter, the select list containing the names of 15 candidates for promotion to the post of Field Supervisors approved by the Board of Directors of the opp. party Bank remains valid for all practical purposes except revision of the relative position/placement of persons in accordance with their inter se seniority in the grade below in terms of the direction of this Court in the earlier writ petition. The petitioners have not assailed their relevant merit position in the gradation list of Senior Glerk cum Cashiers published by the opp. party Bank and as such, they cannot have any grievance if on being found suitable for promotion to the post of Field Supevisors, their seniority in the promotional post is to be maintained according to their position in the grade below, the criteria of promotion being seniority cum merit. The opp. party Bank in its counter has categorically stated that the candidates at SI. Nos. 1 to 8 and 1 1 in the seniority list of Senior Clerk cum Cashier are general candidates, who are found suitable for promotion and their names are included in the promotion/select list. The candidate at SI.No. 14 in the seniority list belonging to the Scheduled Caste category was also promoted as against 15% of the reserved quota. The vacancies being ten. the petitioners who were at SI. Nos. 12, 13 and 31 respectively in the seniority list of Senior Clerk cum Cashier, their names had to be placed below their seniors. The vacancies in the promotional post of Field Supervisor being ten, if ten persons as above have been promoted to the said post, having been found to be fit for promotion, taking their seniority in the grade below in accordance with the direction of the Court no exception can be taken nor the action of the Bank can be faulted.