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

2024 Supreme(Ori) 511

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.
Susanta Kumar Panda – Appellant 
Versus 
Chief Executive Officer Bhawanipatna Central Co-Operative Bank – Respondent 
W.P.(C) No.18811 of 2021
Decided On : 23-08-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:M/s. Ranjit Samal, Satyajit Samal, S. Samal, P. Samal, Advocate
For the Respondent:M/s. Satya Ranjan Pati, S. Mohanty, K. Nayak, Advocate, M/s. Dhananjay Mund, Salauddin Khan, Pratap Kumar Behera, Ankann Panda, Sumant Sahu, Advocate

The court determined that cooperative banks do not qualify as 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution, thus are not amenable to writ jurisdiction.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 - Promotion eligibility and procedures - Writ petition filed challenging the promotion list for Banking Assistants to Assistant Manager-II, with claims of violation of promotional guidelines and natural justice principles. (Paras 1-4, 5.1-5.12)

(B) Judicial Review - Writ jurisdiction limited to statutory bodies or authorities defined under Article 12. Court affirmed that cooperative bank does not qualify as 'State' under Article 12 due to lack of pervasive control by the State. (Paras 5.1-6)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, being eligible Banking Assistants denied participation in the writ test for Assistant Manager promotions, argue against violation of HR Policy that stipulates inclusion criteria; 42 candidates were called, but only 38 participated due to retirements and absences.

Findings of Court:
The writ petition dismissed as the Cooperative Bank is not an authority under Article 12, thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction, validating the promotion process.

Issues: Whether the cooperative society is amenable to writ jurisdiction and legality of the promotion list.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that promoting procedures follow HR policy while also stipulating that mere regulations do not indicate deep State control essential to classify the society as a State.

Result: Writ petition dismissed with no costs.

Table of Content
1. details of the promotional process. (Para 1 , 2)
2. counterarguments by the bank regarding promotion eligibility. (Para 3)
3. maintainability issues of the writ petition. (Para 4)
4. court's reasoning and legal principles applied. (Para 5)
5. final decision on the writ petition. (Para 6 , 7)

JUDGMENT :

MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.

Assailed in the writ petition is the List of Banking Assistants declared eligible for appearing in Written (Merit) Test scheduled to be held on 20.06.2021 for promotion of Banking Assistants-I to next higher grade, i.e., Assistant Manager-II issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Bhawanipatna Central Co-operative Bank, Bhawanipatna in the district of Kalahandi, as enclosed to Letter Reference No.1208— OSCB (ACST) Trg./2019- 20, dated 11.06.2021 of the Principal, Agricultural Cooperative Staff Training Institute, for invocation of provisions under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer(s):

“The petitioners therefore most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to:

i) admit this case,

ii) issue notice to opposite parties for show cause;

iii) quash the list of Banking Assistants eligible for appearing Written (Merit) Test issued by Chief Executive Officer, Bhawanipatna Central Co- Operative Bank, Bhawanipatna in the district of Kalahandi which is was held on 20.06.2021 under Annexure-4 and no result shall be published without leave of the Hon’ble Court till the final adjudication of the writ application and direct the opposite party No.1 to allow the petitioners to participate in the aforesaid Test along with 38 candidates in another date fixed by this Hon’ble Court;

And pass such further order/orders, direction/directions as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow the case with cost;

And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

Facts:

2. The facts as adumbrated in the writ petition reveal that the petitioners, appointees by the Chief Executive Officer, Bhawanipatna Central Co-Operative Bank, Bhawanipatna, District of Kalahandi, (the opposite party No.1) as Banking Assistants in the various Branches, have been placed in the Final Gradation List published in 2015 at Serial No.111, 126, 112, 129, 125, 102, 118, 135, 110, 100, 116 and 130 respectively.

2.1. The Chief Executive Officer, Bhawanipatna Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., the opposite party No.1, issued a Letter No.67/HR/GAD/2020-21, dated 12.04.2021 to the Principal, Agricultural Cooperative Staff Training Institute-opposite party No.2 for conducting Written Examination in consonance with Rule 17 of the Human Resource Policy for the Central Cooperative Banks of Odisha incorporating the Staff Service Rules, 2011 (“HR Policy” for brevity) for filling up of fourteen vacant posts of Assistant Manager-II by way of promotion.

2.2. While the said process was in progress, the Chief Executive Officer, Bhawanipatna Central Co-operative Bank, Bhawanipatna in the district of Kalahandi, the opposite party No.1, by Letter Reference No.1208— OSCB (ACST) Trg./2019-20, dated 11.06.2021 addressed to the Principal, Agricultural Cooperative Staff Training Institute instructed to conduct Merit (Written) Test for promotion of Banking Assistants-I to next higher grade, i.e., (Assistant Manager-II) of Bhawanipatna Central Co-Operative Bank, Bhawanipatna in tune with the provisions under Rule 17 of HR Policy.

2.3. The case of the petitioners is that the promotion policy mentioned in sub-rule (d) of Rule 17 of the HR Policy laid down that, “Promotion may be based on Written Test, interview and Performance Appraisal for Group-C to Group-B, and Group-B to Group-A. For promotions within Group-A, it could be based on interview and Performance Appraisal. 3 times of the number of vacancies for promotion shall be called for the tests.”

2.4. Though the required number of participants in the interview were forty-two, at the time of interview only thirty-eight pa

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