CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this writ application for quashing the results published by the Banking Service Recruitment Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Recruitment Board') for appointments against posts of Officer, Field Supervisor, Clerk-cum-Chashier Clerk-cum Typist, Steno Typist in different Regional Rural Banks (hereinafter referred to as Rural Banks) in the State of Bihar. The petitioners have also sought a direction to the said Recruitment Board to prepare a list of successful candidates in order of merit, for appointment against the different posts in different Rural Banks.

(2.) The Recruitment Board Issued an advertisement on 8-10-1988 inviting applications from eligible candidates, for appointments to the aforesaid posts in different Rural Banks in the State of Bihar. Pursuant to that advertisement these petitioners along with several others made applications. Thereafter, a written competitive examination for the posts of officer and Field Officer was held respectively on 12th February, 1989, and 19th February, 1989. The petitioners along with others appeared at those examinations. On 20th August, 1989, results of the said examinations were published. Interview letters were issued to the candidates, who had been declared successful in the written examinations including the petitioners. It has been stated that the written examination was held for 200 marks and interview was held on the basis of 100 marks The final result was published on 30th November 1989.

(3.) According to the petitioners but for discriminatory and arbitrary procedure adopted by the Recruitment Board the petitioners would have been appointed in any of the Rural Banks against the posts for which they had made applications. It was pointed out that the Recruitment Board had prescribed an arbitrary bar in the advertisement aforesaid requiring each candidate to give choice for being appointed against any post but only in respect of one of the several Rural Banks in the State of Bihar. Clause 6 of the advertisement, which is under challenge, is as follows :