JUDGMENT :

Kuldeep Mathur, J.

1. The instant intra court appeal is directed against the order dated 12.05.2014 passed by the learned Single Bench, whereby the writ petition of the respondent Mr. Kamaljeet Singh was allowed and the respondents (appellants herein) were directed to provide appointment to the respondent-petitioner on the post of ‘Banking Assistant’ in the Central Co-operative Bank of the State of Rajasthan, where candidates having lesser percentage of marks than the petitioner had been appointed.

2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the writ petition are noted hereinbelow:-

The appellants-respondents issued an advertisement bearing No. 8/2010-11, inviting applications for 328 vacant posts of ‘Banking Assistant’ available in various branches of Central Cooperative Banks (hereinafter referred to as ‘CCB’) in 27 districts. The advertisement contained a stipulation requiring candidates to submit option for three of the participating banks. The examinations for the said post were conducted by the Rajasthan Institute of Cooperative Education and Management (RICEM). The respondent-petitioner was declared successful in the written examination held on 27.02.2011 and thereupon, he appeared in the interviews conducted for appointment in CCBs of following districts i.e. Hanumangarh, Sriganaganagar and Bikaner as per options selected in the application form. On not finding place in the final select list, an application under RTI Act, 2005 dated 21.11.2011 was moved by the respondent-petitioner seeking disclosure of final cut-off list pertaining to general candidates of 27 districts. In response to the RTI application, vide letter dated 02.01.2012 marks obtained by the respondent-petitioner in the written examination and interview held for the opted CCBs:-Hanumangarh, Sriganaganagar and Bikaner were provided. Being dissatisfied with the information furnished, the respondent-petitioner served a legal notice dated 11.01.2012 upon appellants-respondents for supplying the desired information. The appellants-respondents, vide communication dated 25.01.2012 furnished the cut-off list pertaining to general candidates for all 27 districts. The respondent-petitioner being aggrieved by the denial of appointment on the post of ‘Banking Assistant’ filed a writ petition before learned Single Bench with the following prayer:

“a) That, by an appropriate, order, directions, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the humble petitioner for the post of banking assistant through, out the state of Rajasthan, in case he was meritorious among the state level. And petitioner may kindly be given the appointment. b) That, by an appropriate order/directions the matter may be remanded back to the respondents with the direction to pass an appropriate order after hearing the humble petitioner c) Any other relief, which just and proper in the facts and the circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the humble petitioner. d) Cost of the litigation may also be awarded to the humble petitioner, from the courts.”

3. Learned Single Bench, vide order dated 12.05.2014 was pleased to allow the writ petition with a direction to appoint respondent-petitioner in a CCB of any district where candidates having lesser percentage of marks in comparison to the respondent-petitioner have been provided appointment.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants-respondents contended that pursuant to Advertisement No. 8/2010-11, all the candidates were extended equal opportunity to submit option for three banks of their choice for appointment to the post of Banking Assistant. He apprised the Court that each cooperative bank is a separate body corporate according to Section 7 of Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 therefore, interview boards of individual banks were constituted vide order dated 4.11.2010. Based on the performance in interview, the candidates were recommended for appointment. All candidates were interv