IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 14011 of 2003(R) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. P.VASUDEVAN,STAFF NO.266,CLERK, SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, KAVANNUR BRANCH,KAVANNUR P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN 673 644. 2. T.P.BALACHANDRAN, STAFF NO.735, CLERK, SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, AREA OFFICE,MANJERI 676 721. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HEAD OFFICE,P.B. NO.10, MALAPPURAM 676 505. *ADDL.R2 INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION, IBPS HOUSE, PLOT NO.166, BEHIND THAKUR POLY TECHNIC, OFF WESTER EXPRESS HIGHWAY, P.B.NO.8587, KANDIVLI, (EAST), MUMBAI - 400 101. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. *(ADDITIONAL 2ND RESPONDENT IS IMPLEDED AS PER ORDER DATED 18/11/2009 IN I.A.NO.4785/2005) ADV. SRI.T.R.RAVI, SC, S.MALABAR G. BANK FOR R1 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP NO.14011/2003 ORDER ON CMP NO. 23641/2003, I.A.NOS.4784/2005, 14072/2007 & 11491/2008 DISMISSED. 18/11/2009 SD/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF ORDER NO.9/SMGB/JC/EF/215/89-90/PAS DATED 13/04/89 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. P2 : COPY OF LETTER NO.9/SMGB/369/90-91/PAD DATED 23/04/90 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. P3 : COPY OF REGIONAL RURAL BANKS (APPOINTMENT & PROMOTION OF OFFICERS & OTHER EMPLOYEES) RULES 1988. P4 : COPY OF REGIONAL RURAL BANKS (APPOINTMENT & PROMOTION OF OFFICERS & OTHER EMPLOYEES) RULES, 1998. P5 : COPY OF LETTER F NO.8(6)/99/RRB DATED 05/06/1999 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO SHRI.K.P.AGARWAL, CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT. P6 : COPY OF MEMO NO.2/91-92 DATED 08/04/1991 OF THE RESPONDENT. P7 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP NO.21909/2000 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 22/01/2003. P8 : COPY OF MEMO NO.26/2003 DATED 20/03/2003 OF THE RESPONDENT. P9 : COPY OF MEMO NO.38/2003 DATED 08/04/2003 OF THE RESPONDENT. P10 : COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED 06/12/2004 OF THE RESPONDENT. P11 : COPY OF MEMO NO.19/2005 DATED 05/03/2005 OF THE RESPONDENT. P12 : COPY OF MEMO NO.22/2007 DATED 21/03/2007 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK. P13 : COPY OF MEMO NO.44/2007 DATED 23/05/2007. P14 : COPY OF MEMO NO.58/2007 DATED 31/07/2007 OF THE RESPONDENT BANK. P15 : COPY OF MEMO NO.67/2008 DATED 08/07/2008 OF THE RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- O.P. No. 14011 of 2003 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The surviving grievance is only in so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned. 2. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as Clerk under the respondent Bank on 26/08/1981. He was promoted as a Senior Clerk on 23/01/1989. Ext.P3 was the promotion policy in force until it was replaced by Ext.P4 dated 11/12/1998. 3. Under Ext.P3, the promotion post for Senior Clerks was Field Supervisor. By Ext.P4, the post of Field Supervisor was re- designated as Officer Gr.I and the post of Senior Clerk was re- designated as Clerk. The post of Officer Gr.I was to be filled up in the ratio of 1:1 between promotees and direct recruits, and the method specified is seniority cum fitness. 4. The case of the 2nd petitioner is that he being a Scheduled Caste candidate eligible for reservation, and as the vacancies are to be filled up following the rule seniority cum fitness, OP No.14011/2003 -2- he ought to have been promoted to the vacancies, which are available prior to the introduction of Ext.P4 promotion policy and remaining unfilled. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Bank. According to the respondent Bank, all vacancies as on the date of introduction of Ext.P4 were already filled up and therefore, the claim of the 2nd petitioner that there were unfilled vacancies and that he ought to be promoted to such vacancies is incorrect. 6. Nothing has been produced by the 2nd petitioner to show that any vacancy was remaining unfilled as on the date of introduction of Ext.P4 or that the case set up by the respondent Bank regarding the nonavailability of vacancy is incorrect. In such circumstances, this Court cannot accept the case pleaded by the 2nd petitioner and direct that he shall be promoted as claimed by him. 7. The further case of the 2nd petitioner is that during 2005-07, when promotions were effected to the post of Officer Gr.I, though he too had applied and was even interviewed, without any justifiable reason his claim for promotion has been ignored. The learned counsel also placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment OP No.14011/2003 -3- of this Court dated 19/08/2008 in Writ Appeal No.2667/2007 in support of his contention that his claim has been overlooked. However, incorporating the claim as above, this original petition has not been amended and pleadings have not been raised to be examined by this Court. Therefore, if at all the petitioner has a grievance that his claim has been overlooked, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue his grievance before the appropriate authorities, taking advantage of the judgment relied on by him as above. This original petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg