HEERALAL ASWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an employee with Rajasthan Rajaya Sahakari Bhoomi Vikash Bank Ltd., Jaipur (hereinafter referred to be as Bank). He is a member of Scheduled Caste. He joined service as Lower Division Clerk. He was transferred to Kota on the year, 1975, and as per the everments made in the petition he is serving at Kota. According to him he was promoted as Office Assistant in the Bank on 25-11-77. This post was redesignated as Assistant Manager w.e.f. 01-01,80. Fourty point Roster system was introduced by the Bank for promotion/appointments on the basis, of instructions issued by the Co-operative Department vide order dated 21.10.76.

(2.) A post of Senior Officer was created in the year, 1979 and same was advertised on-15-9-79. Qualification and requirements of age were specified in the advertisement of (Annexure-2). The maximum age limit was fixed as 35 years. The petitioner has alleged that the management wanted to favour of respondent No.3 Shri Chhagan Lal Sharma and therefore, condition of upper age was waived, in cases of persons who were already in the service of the Bank. This was so done because respondent No.3 had already crossed age limit of 35 years and he would not have come within the age limit. According to the petitioner Managing Director of the Bank had no authority to grant permission of Registrar, Co,operative Societies. No such prior permission had been obtained from the Registrar, Co-operative Societies. The petitioner has asserted that although consideration for these posts ought to have been confined to the members of Scheduled Caste should have been called for interview. In fact candidates belonging to general caste were called for interview. This resulted in unnecessary enlargement of zone of consideration and ultimately the respondent No. 3 was appointed on the post of Senior Officer on the basis of impugned selection. Ac,cording to the petitioner there has been total violation of the forty point roster and the candidates belonging to scheduled caste have been made to suffer on account of arbitrary action of the Bank.

(3.) The respondent No.2 has filed a reply to the writ petition in which the service particulars of the petitioner as given in the petition have by and large been admitted. The respondent No.2 disputed the applicability of Annxure-1 which contains fourty point roster. The advertisement for the post was published in the daily new paper "Rajasthan Patrika" on 21-8-79. A selection board consisting to Shri V.I. Rajgopal, Shri B.L. Sharma and the M.C. Bhandari was constituted. In all 23 candidates were called for interview. Out of these candidates 14 were already in the service in the Bank. The petitioner was also interviewed and considered by the Selection Board. He has signed the attendance sheet in token of his presence before the Selection Board. The petitioner has not been selected by the Selection Board as Assistant Officer as he was not found suitable for the advertised post. Shri Chhagan Lal Sharma, who was in service is Assistant Manager in the Bank was found suitable for the post. Recommendation was also made in favour of Omprakash Nainakwal, a member of scheduled caste for filing the vacancy as and when the same was to become available. The report of selection Committee has been placed on record as Annexure-R-3. According to the respondent No. 2 Shri Omprakash Nainakwal was also appointed by order dated 20-12,80. The respondent Bank has decided to relaxe upper age limit in favour of the departmental candidates. According to it no permission was required from the Registrar, Co-operative Societies because he himself was Chairman of Selection Board. The circular regarding relaxation of age limit has been placed of Annexure R-5.