QAYAMUDDIN Vs. PUNJAB AND SIND BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Taken up through video conferencing.

(2.) The brief facts relevant to the present case are that the petitioner was appointed on ad-hoc basis to the post of Peon with the Punjab & Sind Bank, in Faridkot Zone and is working as such since 1988. The name of petitioner along with one Angrez Singh (whose CWP No.2979 of 2015 already stands allowed by this Court vide order dated 26.10.2016, Annexure P-8) were recommended by the Manager, Zonal Office, Punjab & Sind Bank, Faridkot for absorption against permanent posts as they were fulfilling the condition of having completed 240 days in the preceding 12 months and had also completed 240 days prior to 31.12.1989 as per the settlement between the respondent-Bank and the Workers Union. On 24.06.2000 (Annexure P-1)the Chief Manager, Personnel of the respondent-Bank called upon respondent No.4 to verify the records of the petitioner and Angrez Singh at their own end and if they were fulfilling the criteria then they be called for an interview and their cases be considered for absorption. Vide letter dated 24.06.2000 (Annexure P-2) respondent No.4 sent to respondent No.3 the complete information and record of the petitioner showing that he fulfilled the condition required for absorption of temporary peons as permanent peons and also stating that the petitioner may be called for the interview. On 26.06.2000 the petitioner and Angrez Singh, along with other candidates, were called for the interview for the post of permanent peons. As per the petitioner, though he and Angrez Singh were selected for absorption on permanent posts, they were not considered by the respondent-Bank for absorption as permanent peonsfor want of verification of their records.

(3.) Vide letter dated 16.10.2000 (Annexure P-3) the Deputy General Manager, Personnel of the respondent-Bank called upon respondent No.3 to verify certain facts regarding the service of the petitioner and Angrez Singh. A copy of the said letter was also marked to respondent No.4. Vide letter dated 31.10.2000 (Annexure P-4) respondent No.4 informed the Deputy General Manager, Personnel of the respondent-Bank about the petitioner having worked for 240 days in twelve consecutive months and requested that the name of the petitioner be considered for permanent employment. A copy of the said letter was also marked to respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 vide letter dated 09.11.2000(Annexure P-5) addressed to the Deputy General Manager, Personnel of the respondent-Bank reiterated that the petitioner and Angrez Singh had both been selected by the Selection Committee vide result-sheet and recommendations dated 26.06.2000.