IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 5396 of 2009(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- C.H.DINESHAN, S/O.POKKAY, 53 YEARS, SREYAS NIVAS, PO.VARAM, KANNUR, W/AS DUFTRY IN KANNUR BRANCH OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA. BY ADV. SRI.D.ROBINSON RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CIRCLE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ASST.GENERAL MANAGER, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1-4 SRI.P.GOPAL FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 5396 OF 2009 (T) ===================== Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, a candidate belonging to a Scheduled Caste Community, is working as a Peon in the subordinate cadre of the State Bank of India. It is stated that he is presently posted at the Kannur Branch of the Bank. 2. Ext.P1 is the promotion policy formulated by the Bank for giving the benefit of promotion to the employees in the subordinate staff category. Annexure to Ext.P1 contains the details of the promotion policy. This requires that the eligible employees in the subordinate cadre will have to appear for a written test in General Banking, English Language and General Awareness. It is provided that the employees, who secure minimum 40% marks in the written test in the aforesaid subjects will be imparted basic training in Bank Master/Core Banking/any other Banking Software. After training, the employees will have to appear in another written test on Computer Application and Awareness and on basic knowledge of working on Bank Master/Core Banking/any other Banking Software, which will be WPC No. 5396/09 :2 : followed by an interview. The scheme provides for promotion in the merit channel and also normal channel. 3. From Ext.R1(c), the letter issued by the General Manager of the Bank to the Chief General Manager (HR), it is stated that they propose to conduct a written test on 11th of March 2007, for both merit and normal channel of promotions. In the said letter, it is mentioned that the total marks for written test is 120, out of which, candidates are required to obtain 40% marks and it was proposed to reduce 40 marks for merit ranking. This was subject to approval of the Chief General Manager of the Bank. It is stated that in pursuance thereof, when Ext.P1 was issued, a total of 100 marks was provided for selection process consisting of written test, for additional qualification, performance appraisal and for interview. 4. In response to the notification, petitioner applied for promotion in the normal channel. He appeared in the written test that was held on 11th of March, 2007. From Ext.P2, the reply given to the petitioner in response to an application made by him under the Right to Information Act, he was informed that he WPC No. 5396/09 :3 : got 47 marks in the written test. However, he was not sent for training. 5. In this writ petition, the contention raised by the petitioner is that, in the selection process, maximum marks for written test is limited to 40 and as he has secured more than that, he ought to have been sent for further training. However, according to the Bank, for the written test for which the petitioner appeared, maximum marks provided was 120. They are referring to Ext.R1(a) in this context. It is stated that the petitioner secured 47 marks which is equivalent only to 39%. Therefore, according to the Bank, since the petitioner did not get the prescribed minimum of 40%, he was not eligible to be deputed for training. 6. Therefore, what arises for consideration is the correctness of the claim of the petitioner that since maximum marks prescribed was 40 , as he had secured 47 marks, he ought to have been sent for training. 7. Ext.P1 is the promotion policy. The whole document has to be read in its totality. If it is so read, selection process WPC No. 5396/09 :4 : comprised of three parts, viz., written test, training followed by a written test and interview. In the written test, whether it is merit channel or normal channel, candidates are required to obtain 40% marks. Therefore, if 120 is the total marks prescribed, the minimum marks to be secured is 48. In such circumstances, only those candidates who have secured 48 marks and above are entitled to be deputed for training. Since the petitioner secured only 47 marks, he did not qualify in the written test to be deputed for training 8. As far as the claim of the petitioner that the marks have been limited to 40 is concerned, a reading of Ext.R1(c) itself show that such limiting of marks to 40, has been adopted by the Bank only for merit ranking purposes. It only means that as against 120, when candidates are to be ranked in the order of merit, the total marks of the written test will be adopted as 40, and on that basis, proportionate marks will be awarded to the candidates. However, that does not mean that by the aforesaid process, the Bank was giving a go-by to the requirement that the candidate should obtain the minimum 40% of the total marks in WPC No. 5396/09 :5 : the written test. 9. In the result, the petitioner having got only 47 marks did not secure 40% marks in the written test, and if so, his claim that he ought to have been sent for training cannot be accepted. 10. Since the petitioner has not passed in the written test, his claim that the Bank did not comply with the orders of reservation in favour of Scheduled Caste and scheduled Tribe candidates does not arise for consideration. Writ petition fails and is rejected. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp