GULAB C. GUPTA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners No. 1 and 2 were the candidates for selection for appointment as Manager pursuance to the advertisement (Annexure 'f') and were not found qualified for the purpose. They feel aggriev, ed by the selection and appointment of respondents 5 to 57 as Managers and challenge the legality thereof in this petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution. The petitioner No. 3 claims to be a registered Trade Union representing the employees of respondent No. 3 and challenges the process of selection and appointment of Managers including respondents 3 to 57 in its representative capacity.

( 2 ) FACTS of the case are within a very narrow campus and are as under : respondent No. 3 is a Central Co-operative Bank registered under the m. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and employs several persons for purposes of its business. The terms and conditions of its employees are governed by statutory Rules framed by the respondent registrar under Section 55 (1) of the Act. The Rules are known as the M. P. Co-operative Central Bank Employees Services Rules, 1977 and were brought into force on 1-4-1977. The membership of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document