Advocates:
['B S ADHIKARI', '', 'GIRISH CHANDRA JOSHI', 'SANDEEP TIWARI', 'PANKAJ JOSHI', 'JAYVARDHAN KANDPAL', 'ANIL KUMAR DABRAL', '', 'VINAY KUMAR', 'PRABHAT BOHRA', 'C S RAWAT', 'C S C', 'DHARMENDRA BARTHWAL', 'PIYUSH GARG', 'B M PINGAL', 'VINAY KUMARPRABHAT BOHRA', 'VINAY KUMARPRABHAT BOHRAPIYUSH GARG', 'ANIL KUMAR DABRALVINAY KUMARPRABHAT BOHRA']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAINITAL

SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.

AND

SHRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

18^th JULY, 2022

SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 656 OF 2015

Between:

Almora District Cooperative Bank Limited

& Others

…Appellants

And

Manoj Kumar and others …Respondents

With

SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 657 OF 2015

Between:

Almora District Cooperative Bank Limited

& others

…Appellants

And

Lalit Prasad and others …Respondents

With

SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2022

Between:

Pramod Singh Marchhal and others

…Appellants

And

Manoj Kumar and others …Respondents

Counsel

for

the

appellants.

: Mr. Jayvardhan Kandpal, learned

counsel.

Counsel for the respondents :

Mr. Digvijay Singh Bisht, learned

Counsel, holding brief of Mr. Anil

Anthwal

learned

counsel

for

respondent no. 1.

2

Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned Brief Holder

for the State.

Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel

for the applicants in Impleadment

Application (IA No. 17165/ 2019).

Mr.

D.S.

Patni,

learned

Senior

Advocate

assisted

by

Mr.

Dharmendra

Barthwal,

learned

counsel

for

the

applicants

in

Impleadment Application (IA No.

15511/2019).

JUDGMENT: (per Shri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

1.

The judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court was set aside by Hon’ble Supreme Court and,

upon remand of the matter, these Special Appeals are

being taken up for hearing. Since the judgment dated

14.12.2015 rendered by learned Single Judge in WPSS No.

1889 of 2015 and WPSS No. 2389 of 2015 have been

challenged in these Appeals, therefore, these Appeals are

being heard and decided together.

2.

Special Appeal Nos. 656 of 2015 & 657 of 2015

have been preferred by employer; while, Special Appeal

No. 37 of 2022 has been filed by persons, who were

appointed pursuant to selection in question and had joined

as Class-IV employee in the Bank; but, their services were

subsequently terminated, in view of the judgment

rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

3.

Learned Single Judge had allowed both writ

petitions and had quashed the advertisement dated

21.10.2014 issued by Almora District Co-operative Bank

3

Ltd., whereby applications were invited for appointment

against available vacancies on Class-IV post. The order

passed by Registrar under Section 122 (3) of Uttarakhand

Co-operative Societies Act, 2003, by which procedure for

direct recruitment to Class-IV post was laid down, was

also quashed on the ground that, selection based on

interview alone is inherently bad, and against public policy

as it gives unlimited subjective power to the Selection

Committee.

4.

Operative portion of the impugned judgment is

reproduced below:-

“12. In view of this Court, this process is not a fair

procedure at all. Once the entire criteria for selection is

interview

then

it

would

mean

that

the

Selection

Committee has unlimited subjective powers as there is no

objective criteria by which they can evaluate a candidate

in the present case. This procedure is inherently bad and

against public policy and cannot be allowed to stand by

this Court. Even assuming for the sake of argument that

Mr. Lalit Prasad has already participated in the interview

and since he has already participated in the process

cannot be allowed to challenge the legality and illegality of

the procedure, as he has participated and having failed to

qualify, cannot challenge the process. All the same, the

second petitioner (Manoj Kumar) has not participated in

the interview at all. What is challenged before this Court

is a process which is patently illegal and unfair? Moreover,

in view of this Court, even Mr. Lalit Prasad though has