SANTOSH SARKAR Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Prashant Kumar Sinha, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, for the Respondent/Bank.

(2.) The petitioners have sought direction to the respondents to complete the recruitment process initiated by them pursuant to a Memorandum of Settlement dated 09.08.2012 with respect to Motihari Regional Office of the Central Bank of India, which was cancelled after holding the interview without any apparent/good reason. It has further been prayed in the writ petition that the petitioners, who are casual/temporary workers in various Branches of the respondent/Bank, be absorbed in regular service.

(3.) The sheet-anchor of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that considering the rapid expansion of branch network and progressively reducing subordinate staff strength because of large scale retirement, a need was felt for recruitment of subordinate staffs. Thus, taking a pro-employee initiative, the management of respondent/Bank not only converted all the permanent parttime staff in the subordinate cadre as regular employees but also resolved to appoint afresh such staff from amongst the casual workers serving the Bank and fresh candidates, to be called from the Employment Exchange. A Memorandum of Settlement between the management of the Central Bank of India and Central Bank Employees Federation was thus formulated and signed on 9th of August, 2012.