IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.87 of 2009 1. BEGUSARAI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK NOW KNOWN AS BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER 2. THE BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER 3. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER 4. GENERAL MANAGER, BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER …………………….APPELLANTS Versus 1. SANJAY KUMAR SON OF SRI LOKNATH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLGE + P.O.-OLAPUR GANGAUR, DISTRICT- KHAGARIA 2. PARMANAND PRASAD SINGH SON OF SRI BHOLA PRASAD SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + P.O.-MAHATHI, P.S- BIBHUTIPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR …………………….RESPONDENTS with LPA No.88 of 2009 1. BEGUSARAI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK NOW RENAMED AS BHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER 2. THE CHAIRMAN BEGUSARAI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK NOW RENAMED AS BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER ………………….APPELLANTS Versus 1. RANJAN KUMAR SON OF LATE NARMADESHWAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF COLONY NO. 1, NEAR KALI ASTHAN, P.O+P.S.- KATIHAR, DISTRIUCT- KATIHAR …………………RESPONDENT with LPA No.89 of 2009 1. BEGUSARAI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK NOW RENAMED AS BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BEGUSARAI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, NOW RENAMED AS BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOWK, MUNGER ……………………APPELLANTS Versus 1. PRASHANT KUMAR CHOUDHARY SON OF SHRI RAM NARAIN CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF LOHIA NAGAR, P.O. SUHRID NAGAR, P.S. BEGUSARAI, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI …………………RESPONDENT ----------- 2 For the Appellants :- Dr. Sadanand Jha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Advocate For the respondents :- Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee, Advocate For the Uco Bank :- Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate --------------------- 7 12/11/2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents including writ petitioners in all the appeals. By the judgment and order under appeal the writ court has allowed the writ petitions by holding that introduction of bench marks for the purpose of interview and performance appraisal report contrary to the provisions of the statutory rules cannot be permitted in view of well established principle that circulars and executive instructions can not run counter to the statutory rules. From discussions made by the writ court, it is clear that rules also contain certain bench marks but now by the impugned circular dated 10.1.2005 the Gramin Bank attempted to fix further bench marks adversely affecting the prospect of the concerned Class III employees for promotion to officer grade on the basis of seniority cum merit. We find no infirmity in the order of the writ court. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.) avin