IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 2443 of 1999 Between: 1 K.Prabhakar, S/o Laxmi Narayana, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Head Office, Mahaboobnagar- 509002(AP). 2 G.Ravindhar, S/o Sri Janardhan Roy, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Kothamolgara, Mohabobnagar Dist. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Sri Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Rep by its Chairman, Mahaboobnagar. 2 D.Vishwaprasad, Branch manager, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Peddamandadi. 3 M.Venkataramulu, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Talakondapally. 4 Abdul Rasheed, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Achampet. 5 R.Raghavaiah, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Kothkota. 6 M.Mohan Reddy, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Jadcherla. 7 A.Subramanya Sharma, Sangameswara Grameena Bank, Rajpur. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the Promotions as orderd in Office order No.PR/01/98-99 dt.7-4-98 to the post of MMG Scale-II w.e.f. 7-4-98 as arbitrary, illegal and consequently by quashing the rpomotion of the inofficial respondents direct the respondent No.1 to promote us to the said post w.e.f 7-4-98, without there being any supresessions with all conseqential and attendant benefits including restoration of seniority, arrears of difference of pay etc.and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the promotions as ordered in Office Order No.P/R/01/98-99 dated 7.4.1998 to the post of MMG Scale-II with effect from 7.4.1998 as arbitrary, illegal and set aside the same and consequently direct the first respondent to promote the petitioners to the said post with effect from 7.4.1998. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the employees of erstwhile Sangameshwara Grameena Bank, Mahabubnagar (now A.P. Grameena Vikas Bank) and they are seniors in the cadre of OJM-I. In the seniority list of the Bank, first petitioner’s name was shown at Serial No.13 and second petitioner’s name was shown at serial No.16. It is the contention of the petitioners that promotions to the post of MMG-II is only on the basis of seniority and they are fully qualified and eligible for being promoted to the said post, but the first respondent instead of considering their cases, promoted respondents 2 to 7 impugned order dated 7.4.1998. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of first respondent-Bank denying the allegations made by the petitioners and stating that promotions were made on the basis of seniority-cum- merit. Out of 100 marks, 50 marks were allotted for seniority, 30 marks for performance appraisal for the period of three years and 20 marks for interview. This procedure had been adopted at the instance of NABARD which controls all the Regional Rural Banks. It is not correct to state that 30 marks, which was allotted for three years appraisal can be reduced only when adverse remarks are recorded in the confidential. Fitness implies that there is nothing against an Officer, no disciplinary action is pending against him and none is contemplated. However, NABARD vide its letter No.IDD.RRB.C.107/316(Gen)/87-88 dated 10.2.1988 has clarified that the guidelines contained in the letter No.78 dated 1.12.1987 cannot be interpreted to mean that promotions would be automatic without screening whatsoever. The managements of Regional Rural Banks are not precluded from making objective assessment of the Officer’s potential for considering their suitability for promotions. In this case, Bank has fixed 50% of the marks for seniority and other 50% of marks for assessment of performance and interview, as per the guidelines framed by the Government of India and also NABARD, therefore, the same cannot be said to be either arbitrary or illegal. The sum and substance of the counter is that the petitioner could not come up in the selection as per the norms fixed by the Selection Committee, therefore, his case could not be considered for promotion to the post of MMG Scale-II. In view of the same, the contention raised by the petitioners is liable to be rejected and the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 4.3.2008 DA