IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22822 of 2005(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. P.K.HARIDAS (ARMY NO. 2584900), S/O.P.V.KUMARAN, TEMPORARY WATCHMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CIVIL STATION BRANCH, PALAKKAD, RESIDING AT AMMINIAMMA NILAYAM, MANAKKAMPADAM, KINAVALLUR (PO), PALAKKAD. 2. V.SANKARAN (ARMY NO. 2570193), S/O.VELAN, TEMPORARY WATCHMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, PALAKKAD, RESIDING AT PAYATTINKAD HOUSE, KANNADI (PO), PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 701. BY ADV. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CIVIL STATION BRANCH, PALAKKAD. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, PALAKKAD. 3. ZONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, PERSONNEL AND HRD SECTION, ZONAL OFFICE, L.M.S. COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.22822 of 2005 (P) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners for the post of Armed Guard in the State Bank of India. What led the petitioners to file this writ petition was that as a result of Ext.R3(a) & R3(b), the petitioners were ineligible. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Bank, it is stated that all candidates including the petitioners were allowed to participate in the selection process. Taking note of the above, by order dated 22/02/2006, the Bank was permitted to declare the result of the selection process. It is pointed out that in the selection process both the petitioners failed, and therefore could not get appointment in the post of Armed Guard in the respondent Bank. As already seen the only prayer made in the writ petition is to direct the Bank to consider the petitioners for the post of Armed Guard. From the facts as noticed above, it is evident that they have WP(C) No.22822/2005 -2- been duly considered. Therefore the writ petition has become infructuous by virtue of the aforesaid developments. It is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg