Back
2017 Supreme(MP) 238
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BENCH
P.K. Jaiswal, Virender Singh, JJ.
Bank of India, Mumbai - Appellant
Versus
Rahul - Respondent
W.A. No. 485 of 2016
Decided On : 10-04-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Vinay Zelawat, Shri Pratyush Mishra
For the Respondent: Shri Rishi Tiwari
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of Ex-Servicemen to the benefits of the Graduation certificate issued by the Indian Army for the purpose of promotion, despite settlement terms.
Headnote:
Ex-Serviceman - Promotion Dispute - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Rule No.58 - Office Memorandum No.15012/8/82/ESTT (D) - Clause 2 of the office memorandum dated 14.08.2014 - Section 2(P) and Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Fact of the Case:
The respondent, an Ex-Serviceman, challenged the bank's denial of participation in the promotion process from Sub-ordinate Staff Cadre to Clerical Cadre. The court found in favor of the respondent, considering the certificate issued by the Indian Army and the settlement terms.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent, as an Ex-Serviceman, was entitled to the benefit of the Graduation certificate issued by the Indian Army and should be treated as a graduate for the promotion process, rejecting the bank's objection based on the settlement terms.
Issues: The issues revolved around the eligibility criteria for promotion, the relevance of the certificate issued by the Indian Army, and the impact of the settlement terms on the respondent's entitlement to participate in the promotion process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Rule No.58, Office Memorandum No.15012/8/82/ESTT (D), and Clause 2 of the office memorandum dated 14.08.2014, emphasizing the entitlement of Ex-Servicemen to the benefits of the Graduation certificate issued by the Indian Army.
Final Decision: The writ appeal filed by the bank was dismissed, affirming the respondent's entitlement to be treated as a graduate for the promotion process.
Heard on the question of admission.
2. Facts of the case are that the respondent, who is an Ex-Serviceman being aggrieved by the action of the appellant/bank, in not permitting the respondent to participate in the process of promotion, which is meant for promotion from Sub-ordinate Staff Cadre to Clerical Cadre had filed a writ petition against the order dated 01.09.2015 and prayed that the appellant be directed to consider him as a graduate on the basis of graduation certificate issued by the Indian Army and to permit him to participate in the process of selection from Sub-ordinate Staff Cadre to Clerical Cadre
3. Learned Writ Court considering the fact that the respondent is certainly an Ex-Serviceman and passed Higher Secondary Examination and was in the Indian Army for almost 18 years, relying on the certificate issued by the Indian Army in his favour, in the light of memorandum dated 01.09.2011, came to the conclusion that the respondent is entitled for the benefit flowing out of the certificate issued by the Indian Army on 01.09.2011 and has opined that he has to be treated as graduate for the purpose of promotion process and the objection of the appellant was rejected. In light of the certificate issued by the Indian Army, the respondent is certainly eligible to participate in the process of selection and is also holding the Secondary Certificate with 18 years of service, the action of the appellant in denying the respondent to participate in the process of selection by virtue of notification dated 17.08.2015 is bad in law and allowed the writ petition by directing the appellant/bank to treat the respondent as graduate for the purpose of appointment/promotion, keeping in view the notification dated 17.08.2015 and directed the appellant that in case the respondent is selected in the process of selection, the bank shall confirm all the benefits to the respondent and disposed of the writ petition.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the certificate (Annexure-P/1) dated 01.09.2011 and submitted that the same can be treated only for the purpose of appointment in any reserved vacancy in Group 'C' posts. The aforesaid certificate cannot be used for further promotion process after direct recruitment. His next submission is that the promotion process is being carried out on the basis of settlement dated 15.11.2014 between the Management of Bank of India and the Representatives of the Federation of Bank of India Staff Unions and is therefore, binding upon all the employees of the bank since the elected members of the appellant and respondent were party to the bi-party agreement/settlement arrived, entered and signed between them. He has also pointed out that the eligibility criteria for the said promotion as per the settlement are graduate of recognised University with one year service or SSC or other equivalent examination of Government recognised Examination Board with 15 years of completed service in the bank. The respondent was only higher secondary. As per the certificate issued by the Indian Army, he could not be treated at par with the graduation certificate issued by the Recognised Board and approved by the UGC. However, since the respondent is Ex-Serviceman, so the benefit of quota had been extended to him for the purpose of appointment but this benefit cannot be extended twice as the respondent had already exhausted the benefit of being an Ex-Serviceman and now he is just like a civilian so Army certificate cannot be treated as a graduation certificate for the purpose of promotion from Sub-ordinate Cadre to Clerical Cadre from the existing staff and prayed for setting aside the impugned order.
5. The certificate dated 01.09.2011 issued by the Indian Army reads as under :-
INDIAN ARMY
GRADUATION CERTIFICATE
1. As per Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pension (Department of Personnel and Training) Office Memorandum No.15012/8/82/ESTT (D) dated 12.2.1986, Ex
