VINOD KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of appointment letter dtd. 4/1/2017 (Annexure P-10) whereby respondent No.4 was appointed on the post of Peon. The petitioner is further seeking direction to the respondents to appoint him on the post of Peon.

(2.) The undisputed facts emerging from the record are that pursuant to an advertisement issued by the respondents for the post of Peon, 41 candidates applied under different categories. There were 05 posts meant for general category and 04 posts for reserved category. The petitioner belongs to OBC category. The petitioner came to be selected vide appointment letter dtd. 4/1/2017. CWP No. 1070 of 2017 came to be filed before this Court assailing selection of different candidates. The petitioner herein was respondent No.7 in the said writ petition. The writ petition came to be disposed of as during the pendency of said writ petition, the respondents recasted selection list. In the recasted selection list, the petition was fired and another candidate came to be selected. The candidature of the petitioner was cancelled vide communication dtd. 9/4/2017. The petitioner attempted to collect documents relating to qualification of respondent No.4. The petitioner filed an application under Right to Information Act and ultimately, succeeded in getting information to the extent that respondent No.4 is a graduate whereas maximum qualification prescribed as per advertisement was 10+2. Faced with this, the respondent-bank dismissed the respondent No.4. It is apt to notice that respondent No.4 was dismissed during the pendency of present writ petition. The petitioner on account of appointment of respondent No.4 was at Serial No.1 in the waiting list.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent-bank by mistake or otherwise appointed respondent No.4 who was ineligible for the post. The appointment of respondent No.4 was cancelled on account of filing of present writ petition. The natural corollary of dismissal of respondent No.4 was that the petitioner should be considered for the post because he was shifted from the select list to waiting list on account of adjustment of respondent No.4.