The main legal point established in the judgment is that the terms of the advertisement for recruitment must be interpreted as per their unambiguous meaning, and candidates must satisfy the criteria laid down by the Bank in the advertisement for appointment/recruitment.

CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J.

In the present appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of this Court, the appellant is aggrieved by an order, dated 1.3.2013, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3163/2013, whereby a learned single Judge of this Court has dismissed an application filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indian, which had given rise to C.W.J.C. No. 3163/2013.

2. Before coming to the dispute involved in the present appeal, the relevant facts are required to be briefly noticed. For the purpose of selection of personnel for Probationary Officer/Management Trainee course in the Public Sector Banks, a Common Written Examination (CWE) is conducted by the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS). The said examination is a prerequisite for selection to 19 participating Public Sector Banks including UCO Bank. The IBPS is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and a Public Trust under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, which has been authorized by the Indian Banks' Association (IBA) to hold the said Common Written Examination (CWE) for selection and appointment to the post of Probationary Officer/Management Trainee. Candidate, aspiring to join Public Sector Banks as Probationary Officer/Management Trainee, are essentially required to take the common written examination (CWE) held by the IBPS and those, who secure minimum qualifying marks in Common Written Examination (CWE), are given Score Cards.

3. Successful candidates in Common Written Examination (CWE), who have been issued Score Cards and who meet the stipulated eligibility criteria only can apply to any participating Banks quoting their Common Written Examination (CWE) scores. Each participating Bank (in the present case, UCO Bank) is required to individually shortlist candidates and carry out their own selection process, such as, Group Discussions and/or Interview, etc., for the final selection.

4. The appellant qualified in the said Common Written Examination (CWE) conducted by the IBPS.

5. The UCO Bank came out with an advertisement inviting applications for recruitment of 1100 Probationary Officers, in Junior Management Grade Scale-I (GMGS-I), in Generalist Cadre, on 7.2.2012. The controversy, in the present case, relates to eligibility criteria, as prescribed under Clause 2 of the said advertisement, with respect to minimum educational qualification, the relevant portion whereof reads thus:

"Graduate in any discipline from a recognized University in pass course with 55% aggregate marks."

(Emphasis is added)

6. The appellant claims to have done her graduation in Sociology (Hons.) from Patna University and she is said to have scored 445 marks in Honours papers, which is 55.625%. She claims that having more than 55% of marks in Honours course at graduation level, she fulfills the minimum educational qualification as laid down in Clause 2 of the advertisement.

7. She has, however, been denied appointment on the ground that she has less than 55% marks, if her aggregate is taken into account considering her scores in other two pass course papers, i.e., History and Economics, at the graduation level. Her percentage of marks has been found to be 52.066% after including her score in subsidiary pass course and Honours papers. It is her case that the percentage of marks, at graduation level, ought to have been computed on the basis of her score in Honours papers and not in pass course papers.

8. Learned single Judge, having found no merit in the case, dismissed it by the order under appeal, dated 1.3.2013, in the light of another order passed by the learned single Judge on the same date in C.W.J.C. No. 3059/2013.

9. Mr. Bishwanath Upadhyay, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant, has argued that once a joining letter was issued in favour of the appellant by UCO Bank after the appellant was allowed to participate in the process of selection, the respondents were estopped from declining to accept her joining. It