IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of locus standi and its application in the context of a private interest litigation.

JUDGMENT :

Arijit Banerjee, J.

1. The Judgment and order dated April 8, 2022, whereby the writ petition of the respondent no. 1 herein being WPA No. 5454 of 2022, was allowed by a learned Single Judge, is sought to be challenged by the present intending appellant. An application for leave to appeal has been filed by the intending appellant being CAN 1 of 2022, since he was not a party to the writ petition.

2. When the application for leave to appeal was moved on August 26, 2022, a Coordinate Bench recorded as follows:-

“There is strong opposition from the respondents to leave being granted to the appellant to file this appeal. Let affidavits-in opposition be filed by the respondents to the application for leave to appeal, the application for condonation of delay as also the stay petition, within four weeks from date i.e. September 23, 2022. The petitioner would be at liberty to file his replies by November 9, 2022.

List the matter under the same heading on November 11, 2022.

The affidavits that the respondents may file will be without prejudice to their contention that this appeal is not maintainable.”

3. After exchange of affidavits the parties were heard at length on several days not only on the point of locus standi of the intending appellant to maintain the appeal but also on points touching the merits of the case.

4. The brief factual background of the case is that pursuant to a process of recruitment for appointment in Grade III posts of the Vidya Sagar Central Cooperative Bank Limited (in short “the bank”), five successful candidates from the prepared panel were appointed in the Schedule Cast category. The panel was treated as a waiting list in so far as the other candidates named in the panel were concerned. One of the five original appointees in the Schedule Cast category tendered resignation. The writ petitioner claimed that since he was the 6th person named in the panel, he was to be appointed in the post that fell vacant. Since such appointment was not coming through, he approached the learned Single Judge.

5. Before the learned Single Judge it was submitted on behalf of the bank that due to certain reasons beyond the control of the bank, no steps could be taken for appointing the writ petitioner who is the first candidate in the waiting list. The learned Judge held on the basis of documents disclosed that the panel still subsisted and was valid. Accordingly the learned Judge disposed of the writ petition with the following direction:-

“In such view of the matter, WPA No. 5454 of 2022 is allowed, thereby directing the respondent no. 6, the Chairman, Vidyasagar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., to take steps as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a fortnight from date, for granting appointment to the petitioner in the vacant post, out of the five candidates of the final list initially published for recruitment to the Grade –III category under the SC category.”

6. The writ petitioner was appointed in the concerned post in terms of the learned Single Judge’s order.

7. The applicant in CAN 1 of 2022 tried to establish his locus standi to maintain the appeal by saying that he was a member of the Board of Directors of the Bank. The appointment of the Respondent no. 1 is illegal which is likely to tarnish the reputation of the bank. Hence he should be permitted to assail the order of the learned Single Judge pursuant to which the respondent no. 1 was appointed.

8. Learned Senior Counsel representing the applicant referred to the final merit list of successful candidates pertaining to Grades II, III and IV. The present case is concerned with Grade III posts. Serial numbers 50 to 78 of the list pertain to SC category in connection with Grade III posts. The name of the respondent no. 1/writ petitioner appears at Serial No. 55.

9. Our attention was drawn to the minutes of the relevant meeting approving the final merit list. The candidates against Serial Nos.50 to 54 of the final merit list were selected for appointment i