JYOTI PRAKASH NAYAK Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of Order No. 7 dated 23.10.2006, this Judgment is confined only to the maintainability of the Writ Petition in this Court.

(2.) IN this Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges the appointment of Opposite Parties 2 to 12 as Manager (Law) in the middle management grade/scale - II in the Union Bank of India (Opposite Party No. 1) and seeks for a direction to Opposite Party No. 1 to appoint him as Manager (Law). The grievance of the Petitioner is that Opposite Parties 2 to 12 have been appointed ignoring his legitimate claim by awarding less marks to him and by allocating unreasonable percentage of marks in the viva voce test.

(3.) OPPOSITE Party No. 1 in its counter affidavit has stated that the Writ Petition is not maintainable in this Court since the advertisement itself ousted the jurisdiction of Courts other than those in Mumbai. Clause 8(1) of the advertisement stipulates that any resultant dispute arising out of this advertisement shall be subject to the sole jurisdiction of the Courts situated at Mumbai. Learned Counsel for Opposite Party No. 1 vehemently contended thatsince the advertisement itself contains such ouster clause and the Petitioner had accepted the same while making his application under the Union of Bank Recruitment Project, 2004, he cannot be allowed to prosecute this case in this Court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Shree Subhlaxmi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. v. Chand Mal Baradia and Ors. : AIR2005SC2161 ; and Rite Approach Group Ltd. v. Rosoboronexport : AIR2006SC401 .