( 1 ) AN officer of State Bank of Mysore questions the selection and appointment of 4th respondent to the post of Senior Management Grade scale IV in the services of the Bank, inter alia on the ground that he is more meritorious than the 4th respondent and therefore, the Selection committee was not justified in preferring the 4th respondent than to him.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are. Petitioner and the 4th respondent were selected as Middle Management Grade Scale II Officers in the services of respondent-Bank pursuant to an advertisement issued by the central Recruitment Board. After such selection, petitioner was appointed and posted to work as Deputy Law Officer of the Bank at Hubli zonal Office with its headquarters at Hubli. The 4th respondent was appointed as Deputy Law Officer and posted to work at the zonal office at Mysore. Both of them have reported for duty at the place of their postings on 31-12-1984. Petitioner asserts that he was treated as senior among the Law Officers selected in Scale II. This assertion has neither any significance nor relevance for deciding the lis between the parties in this petition. After working for nearly five years in the