IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 OP.No. 14767 of 2001(G) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. P.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, APARNA, KALARCODE P.O ALAPPUZHA- 688 003. 2. SAM PHILIP THODUVASSERIL BETHEL R.S.P.P.O, THIRUVALLA - 689 111 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER (PERSONNEL & HRD DEPT.), LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, "CIRCLETOP HOUSE", RAJAJI SALAI CHENNAI - 600 001. 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER (SR.) FOR R2 SRI.P.GOPAL FOR R2 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.NO.14767/01 :2: ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.23289/01 IN O.P.NO.14767/01 DISMISSED 01/12/2008 SD/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DT.22.12.1999 ISSUED BY R1. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.6.4.2001 SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4:TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.2.5.2001 RECEIVED FROM THE RESPONDENTS BY 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.23.4.01 RECEIVED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6:TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.29.1.02 ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KALAVOOR BRANCH. /True Copy/ P.A.TO JUDGE. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ----------------------------------------------- O.P. No.14767 OF 2001 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are Assistants (Accounts) in the service of the State Bank of India in Kommadi Branch in Alleppey District and in Kumbanadu Branch in Pathanamthitta District respectively. Their grievance in this petition is regarding non selection for promotion to the post of Junior Manager Grade Scale I. The promotion is on the basis of merit to be assessed by a written examination and an interview conducted for that purpose. Ext.P1 is a circular issued by bank governing the same. As per the regulation the maximum marks provided for the written test is 60. The petitioners obtained only 26 and 27.50 marks respectively, which was not sufficient for being included in the rank list of promotion. According to them, they had performed very well in the written test and they expected much more marks than what have been awarded to them. The petitioners therefore challenge the selection procedure itself. The petitioners seek the following reliefs: O.P.NO.14767/01 2 a)To declare that the conduct of the written examination for promotion to the post of Officers in Junior Management Grade I by the State Bank of India in March, 2000 is patently violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. b)To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding respondents to conduct revaluation of all the answer papers particularly of the petitioners for the aforesaid examination, revalue the same and then publish the results afresh. c)To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding respondents to accordingly promote the petitioners after the revaluation aforesaid to the post of Officers in Junior Management Grade.I." 2. A Counter Affidavit has been filed by the respondents detailing the procedure adopted for conducting the test and interview. According to them, the written test has been conducted in accordance with law and there was no irregularity whatsoever in the same. They would contend that, after evaluating the merits of all the candidates on the basis of the O.P.NO.14767/01 3 written test and interview, persons higher in rank was chosen for promotion. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. Apart from their own assessment of their merit, the petitioners have not furnished any materials whatsoever to show that the selection procedure is in any way vitiated. The petitioners cannot seek revaluation of the answer paper in so far as Ext.P1 guidelines for conduct of the promotion test does not contemplate revaluation of answer papers. The petitioners have not been able to plead and prove malafides on the part of the respondents. Selected candidates have also not been impleaded in the original petition without which the original petition is bad for non-joinder of parties also. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the contentions raised in the original petition. accordingly the same is dismissed. (S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE) sks/- O.P.NO.14767/01 4 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. OP No.14767 of 2001 JUDGMENT 1st December, 2008