IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15518 of 2010 VARSHA KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF SHRI SOHAN LAL CHAKRAVARTY, RESIDENT OF RUKMINI BHAWAN, NORTH PATLIPUTRA, GOSAI TOLA, P.S. PATLIPUTRA COLONY, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, CORPORATE OFFICE, MUMBAI. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, CENTRAL RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION DEPARTMENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE OFFICE, MUMBAI. 3. ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, CENTRAL RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION DEPARTMENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE OFFICE, MUMBAI. 4. ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER(HR) RECRUITMENT CELL, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, PATNA. For the petitioner : Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Advocate. For the S.B.I. : M/s. Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha, Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocates. ----------- 04. 20.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State Bank of India(hereinafter referred to as the Bank). 2. Petitioner was applicant for the post of Probationary Officer in the Associate Bank of the Bank pursuant to advertisement Annexure-1. Having participated in the selection process, she became successful in the written test but was non-suited to appear in the interview on the ground that she failed to secure 60% marks in aggregate of all subjects irrespective of optional/ additional optional subjects studied by her in intermediate examination. She challenged Note-2 of the eligibility criteria as arbitrary, violative of Articles-14, 16 of the Constitution of India. For ready reference Note-2 of the eligibility criteria is quoted hereinbelow :- (2) The percentage of marks in XIIth Std./Diploma Course/Graduation shall be arrived at by dividing the marks obtained by the candidate in all the subjects by aggregate maximum marks of all subjects irrespective of - 2 - optional/additional optional subjects studied. Similar percentage of marks in Graduate shall be arrived at by dividing the percentage of marks obtained by the candidate in all subjects by maximum marks of the all subjects of Course(both for Pass/Honour Course) for all the years of the Course. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that had the petitioner not appeared/opted for the optional/additional optional subjects in the intermediate examination she would have been allowed to appear in the interview as she secured 60% marks in aggregate of compulsory subjects but as petitioner did not secure 60% marks in aggregate of all subjects irrespective of optional/additional optional subjects studied she has not been allowed to appear in the interview. In this connection, it is further submitted that there may be a candidate who has not opted/appeared in the optional/additional optional subjects in the intermediate examination and if he/she has secured 60% in aggregate of the compulsory subjects, he/she is allowed to appear in the interview. It is submitted that there is no rational for taking aggregate of optional/additional optional subjects as according to the counsel the eligibility criteria does not exclude others who have not appeared/opted for optional/additional optional subjects at intermediate level from becoming eligible under the advertisement. According to counsel the eligibility criteria is irrational as it is treating both who have appeared/opted for optional/additional optional subjects and those who have appeared only in the compulsory subjects on the same pedestal as in both the case candidate becomes eligible if he/she secures 60% in aggregate i.e. with or without - 3 - optional/additional optional subjects. The contents of the eligibility clause should be the concern of the employer unless the clause is irrational and arbitrary violative, of Articles-14, 16 of the Constitution. 4. In view of the contents of Note-2, this Court will permit the petitioner to invite the attention of respondent no.2 about the irrationality of the eligibility clause i.e. the candidate(s) become eligible if he/she secures 60% in aggregate with or without the optional/additional optional subjects at intermediate level. 5. Let respondent no.2 consider the aforesaid aspect of the matter and take appropriate decision for future guidelines of the Bank as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt of this order by respondent no.2. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. AFR Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)