IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 2692 of 2005() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24354/2005 Dated 21/10/2005 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. P.V.UMA, PADIKKAL LANE, THAYATHERU, KANNUR - 2. 2. T.DEVADASAN, THARAMMAL HOUSE, ELAYAVOOR SOUTH, P.O.MUNDAYAD, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SMT.VIDHYA. A.C RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER (PERSONNEL), STATE BANK OF INDIA (PERSONNEL SECTION), ZONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KANNUR BRANCH, KANNUR. BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SC,S.B.I THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.A.NO.2692 OF 2005 (E) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. Petitioners were working as Temporary/Substitute Sweepers and Cook respectively in the 2nd respondent Bank. According to the claimants, 1st petitioner worked as Sweeper for about nine years with the respondent. It is also stated that 2nd petitioner had worked as temporary cook at Kannur Branch of the bank also. It is their case that they were asked to apply for regular appointment. They were called for an interview in 1999. But results were not declared. Second respondent Bank has filed a detailed statement. They accepted the factual conditions made therein. It is averred as follows: “The Bank had decided to conduct an interview for preparing a list of eligible candidates to fill up permanent vacancies as they arose. Persons who had worked as W.A.2692/05 2 temporary/substitutes were also called for the interview along with other eligible candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange.” Further it is submitted as follows: “The interview was conducted on the 8th, 9th and 10th of March 1999. Both the petitioners were called for the interview on 10th March 1999 and they appeared for the interview on the said day.” The only hindrance in not making final orders regarding appointment is that the Madras High Court had passed an interim stay regarding the appointment. Order passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in C.M.P.Nos.16289 and 16290 of 1999 is as follows: “Status quo as on today to be maintained till 10.11.1999. But the respondent Bank is at liberty to go on with the Preliminary proceedings regarding selection but nobody shall be appointed without the permission of this Court” No order was produced extending the time mentioned therein W.A.2692/05 3 after 10.11.1999. But it is stated that writ appeal in the Madras High Court is still pending. But the petitioners are working in Kerala State and now there is a separate circle for the Bank in the Kerala State. In the above circumstances, we clarify that the order of the Madras High Court is applicable only in Madras State and the bank has only interviewed persons from the employment exchange as well as the former workers who had worked as temporary/substitutes. Therefore, we leave the matter to the State Bank of India to finalise the selection process, as far as the Kerala State is concerned, as early as possible, and in any event, within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 4th March, 2008