THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.NO.824 OF 2001 ORDER: This writ petition has been instituted seeking a declaration for non-maintenance of 40 point roaster and not observing the rule of reservation in favour of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe category employees in the matter of promotion and also not giving relaxation of qualifying marks in the matter of promotion to those candidates, as illegal. The writ petitioner joined the service of the Respondent Bank, which is a Regional Rural Bank established in terms of the Regional Rural Banks Act (Act No.21 of 1976) as a Cashier-cum-Clerk in the year 1986. He is a member belonging to the Scheduled Caste community. The next promotion to which he is aspiring is to the post of Officer Scale-I. In terms of Section 29 of Act No.21 of 1976 r/w Section 17 thereof, the Central Government, after consultation with NABARD and the sponsor Banks, framed the Regional Rural Banks (Appointment and Promotion of Officers and other Employees) Rules, 1988. As per these Rules, the posts are liable to be filled in on the basis of seniority-cum- merit. The feeder category for promotion to Officer Scale- I is Cashier-cum-Clerk. One is required to pass matriculation or its equivalent examination and must have put in ten years of experience in the feeder category. The selection process comprises of a written test for 70 marks, an oral interview test for 20 marks and a performance appraisal for 10 marks. Candidates are required to secure a minimum of 40% of marks in both English and Banking Law and Practices Papers to become eligible for being interviewed. This very question as to how to fill up the posts of Officer Scale-I in Regional Rural Banks on the basis of seniority-cum- merit, has fallen for consideration before the Supreme Court in B.V. SIVAIAH AND ORS. V. K. ADDANKL BABU AND ORS[1]. In Paragraph No.17 and 18 of the Judgment, the Supreme Court has answered the question in the following words: “17. …………….. While applying the principle of seniority-cum-merit for the purpose of promotion what is required to be considered is inter se seniority of the employees who are eligible for consideration. Such seniority is normally determined on the basis of length of service, but as between employees appointed on the same date and having the same length of service, it is generally determined on the basis of placement in the select list for appointment. Such determination of seniority confers certain rights and the principle of seniority-cum-merit gives effect to the such rights flowing from seniority. It cannot, therefore, be said that in the matter of promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-merit seniority has no role where the employees eligible for promotion were appointed on the same date and have the same length of service. 18. We thus arrive at the conclusion that the criterion of 'seniority-cum- merit' in the matter of promotion postulates that given the minimum necessary merit requisite for efficiency of administration the senior, even though less meritorious, shall have priority and a comparative assessment of merit is not required to be made. For assessing the minimum necessary merit the competent authority can lay down the minimum standard that is required and also prescribe the mode of assessment of merit of the employee who is eligible for consideration for promotion. Such assessment can be made by assigning marks on the basis of appraisal of performance on the basis of service record and interview and prescribing the minimum marks which would entitle a person to be promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-merit.” In view of this authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court, the various questions raised in this writ petition need not be traveled all over again. However, it has to be ascertained as to whether the principle of Seniority-cum-Merit has not been departed in any case while effecting the promotions. Sri S. Udayalachala Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank, has placed today before me a seniority list of Cashier-cum-Clerks, working in the bank as on 18-04-2000 and the name of the writ petitioner herein was figuring at Serial No.15 therein, whereas the names of the unofficial respondents 2 to 5 figured at Serial Nos. 1, 4, 10 and 3, respectively. Thus, there could not have been any dispute that the unofficial respondents, who have been promoted to the post of Officer Scale-I, are seniors to the writ petitioner. When once the Bank has assessed the minimum requisite merit among the competing candidates, then, the senior, even though comparatively less meritorious, shall have priority in the matter of promotion. The minimum assessment of merit was reflected in the Rule itself. When once the competing candidates have attained the said benchmark, the promotions thereafter to the requisite numbers will have to be awarded in the descending order of seniority of such candidates. Hence, no junior to the writ petitioner has been promoted and he cannot make out any grievance in that regard. However, it was also sought to be contended in the writ petition that the principles of reservation in the matter of promotion in favour of the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, has not been extended. It is now been a settled principle of law that providing for reservation in favour of the members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in the matter of promotion is only a enabling provision and it is for the employer to take all relevant factors into account and consideration and prescribe such a reservation. For these reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed, but however, without costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J mrk 11th November 2009 [1] AIR 1998 SC 2565