SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Ker) 274

Judges : A.R.LAKSHMANAN,D.SREEDEVI
Indian Bank - Appellant
Versus
Jayasree - Respondent
Case No : W.A.No. 20 of 1998
Decided On : 07/08/1998
Advocates Appeared :
E. Subramani & A.L. George Aappilly For Appellants B.S. Krishnan (Sr. Advocate), an and & Gracious Kuriakose For Respondents

The non-joining duty vacancy should be filled from the waiting list, and the Reserve Bank of India's restrictions do not apply to such vacancies.

Headnote:

Recruitment - Non Joining Duty Vacancy - Banking Service Recruitment Board - [Recruitment] - [Banking Service Recruitment Board] - [Non Joining Duty Vacancy]

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over the appointment of a candidate for a non-joining duty vacancy in a bank. The respondent sought a writ of mandamus to appoint her to the vacancy.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the non-joining duty vacancy should be filled by a candidate from the waiting list, as the vacancy was not a fresh vacancy and was not subject to the restrictions imposed by the Reserve Bank of India.

Issues: The main issue was whether the non-joining duty vacancy should be filled from the waiting list and whether the Reserve Bank of India's restrictions applied to the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the non-joining duty vacancy should be filled from the waiting list and that the Reserve Bank of India's restrictions did not apply to the case.

Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed, and the appellant bank was directed to consider and appoint the candidate suggested by the Banking Service Recruitment Board for the non-joining duty vacancy.

Judgment :-

A.R. Lakshmanan, J.

Heard Mr. E. Subramani, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. an and, learned counsel for the second respondent and Mr. Grashious Kuriakose, learned counsel for the impleaded party.

2. The writ appeal is directed against the judgment in O.P. No. 6138 of 1997, dated 11th November, 1997. The second respondent by a notification dated 28.6.1995 invited applications among others for the post of Clerk-cum-Cashier, Typist-cum-Clerk (English) and Stenographer (English) from among eligible candidates in respect of vacancies likely to arise during the year 1995-96 in the Public Sector Banks in the State of Kerala, Mahe and Union Territories of Lakshadweep. 1st respondent, Jayasree, was one of the applicants. According to her, after a process of selection, which included a written test, a skilled test and an interview, she was included in Ext. P1 select list prepared by the 2nd respondent - the Banking Service Recruitment Board. According to the 1st respondent, she was included in the wait list for the post of Clerk-cum-Cashier with rank No. 15 in the general category and as serial No. 9 in the general category for the post of Typist-cum-Clerk (English). It is her case that the said list was to remain valid for one year from 23.4.1996 or till the finalisation of the next recruitment result, whichever is earlier. 15 candidates from the main list have been offered for appointment in the services of the appellants pursuant to the requisition made by the appellants. One out of 15 candidates offered appointment did not accept the saidm appointment and join duty and that the said non joining duty vacancy was not reported to the 2nd respondent by the appellants.

3. The first respondent on the premise that had only the said non joining duty vacancy been reported by the appellants to the Banking Service Recruitment Board,

the first respondent, 15th candidate in the waiting list for Clerk-cum-Cashier would have certainly been advised by the Recruitment Board leading eventually for her appointment as Clerk-cum-Cashier in the services of the appellants. She also alleged that consequent on the termination of the service of Smt. T. Remadevi in the year 1996, there is a vacancy available in the service of M/s. Union Bank of India and that the second respondent has not, despite such vacancy being reported to it, furnished the name of any candidate for appointment against such vacancy and that the first respondent could have been offered appointment to such vacancy. She therefore, tiled O.P, No. 6138 of 1997 with the following prayers: L issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd and 3rd respondents to report to the 1st respondent BSRB the vacancy of Clerk-cum-Cashier available in the service of the 2nd respondent consequent on the non joining duty of the candidate appointed from Ext. P1 before the expiry of Ext. P1 wait list and the 1st respondent to take action to send up the name of the petitioner to the 2nd and 3 rd respondents for appointing the petitioner and further directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to appoint the petitioner expeditiously and within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to send up the name of the petitioner for appointment in the service of the Union Bank of India against the one vacancy of Clerk-cum-Cashier reported to it during the currency of Ext. P1 expeditiously and within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and directing the 4th and 5th respondents to appoint the petitioner expeditiously and within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and

ii grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including the costs of this Original Petition."

4. In C.M.P. No. 11138 of 1997, the petitioner prayed for issue of an interim direction to the Bank to report to the Bank







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top