The principle of seniority-cum-merit for promotion requires that seniority be given due consideration, and that comparative merit be assessed only among those who are equally senior.

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.

1. In the first writ application bearing C. W. J. C. No.1452 of 1986 prayer of the petitioners is for quashing the Resolution dated 4th/5th February, 1986 contained in Annexure-3 fixing criterion for promotion of officers to the post of area Manager in Bhojpur Rohtas gramin Bank and for issuance of appropriate writ/direction/order commanding the respondents not to give effect to the promotion list, contained in the said Annexure-3 and/or any other appropriate relief/reliefs, which the petitioners in the circumstances are entitled to.

2. In the second writ petition bearing C. W. J. C. No.7556 of 1992 prayer on behalf of the petitioners is to quash the said annexure 3 pursuant to which the respondent Nos.3 to 17 have been promoted to the post of Area manager/senior Manager and to issue appropriate writ/direction/order commanding the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to promote the petitioners to the post of area Manager/senior Manager with effect from the date the respondents Nos.3 to 17 have been promoted.

3. As substantially the prayer in both the writ applications as well as the questions of law are common, with the consent of the parties, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment/order.

4. In short, the relevant facts are that the petitioners are officers/branch manager working in Bhojpur Rural gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as bank) and they claim to be eligible to be promoted to the post of Area manager/senior Manager in the Bank. The said Bank has been constituted under the Urban Rural Banks Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and it has been sponsored by Punjab National Bank, which is a nationalised bank and holds 35% of the shares, 505 of the shares are held by the Government of Bihar, on 20th September, 1982 a seniority list of Officers working in the bank was circulated vide personnel division Circular No.23/82, in which, as claimed by the petitioners, they were senior to many of the concerned respondents. On 31-12-84 the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as NABARD) issued circular letters to chairmen of all Regional Rural Banks fixing eligibility and other criterion for appointment of Area Manager and other senior Managers in the Rural banks. NABARD is an instrument of reserve Bank of India and is an apex institution for Rural Banks in India.

5. There were 13 vacancies in the bank for Area Manager and for filing of the same by promotion/appointment interview letters were issued to 29 officers placed at S1. Nos.1 to 28 and 35 in the said seniority list on 27-1-86. It is alleged that had the promotion matter been taken up in 184 when the vacancies occurred, persons only upto S1. No.23 of the seniority list would have become eligible for promotion, but only on account of delay of two years, six more persons have become eligible. The interview were held on 4-2-86 and 5-2-86 and on that basis the concerned respondents were declared successful for promotion by adopting the cut-off mark of 50.2 or more marks in selection process. The criterion followed by the board of Directors at the time of interview itself in making selection was as follows: (i) Service records. . . . . . . Maximum 30 marks. (ii) Performance. . . . . . . Maximum 30 marks. (iii) interview. . . . . . Maximum 40 marks. Out of the total marks allotted for service-records, 9 marks were allotted for length of service, i. e. one mark for one year service and the maximum 21 marks were allotted lor confidential records of last three years of the candidate (56 marks for satisfactory service and 7 marks for good service ). Under the head performance 5 marks were allotted for each excellent performance for which the candidates received letters of appreciation subject to maximum of 15 marks and the remaining 15 marks were awarded for the quality of their work. Under this head provisions of negative marking were also made for the unsatisfactory