Uurg 2. Tubidas P. /»'>ayani, son of Prabhudas Mayoni, aged about 46 yeefs, resident of L.I..&. 424, PadmanAhpur. 1. Dena Svsk. Throuah it'; Branch Manoaer'. &uni Ashok Kumar Durugkur, son of Shri Aauty ',d abi ?f Janto Market, PadmanabhDur Durg, Oistrict Chhattisoarh) Constitution of India ffi.r. H.B. Anrawal, 5enior Advocate for- the petitioners. ^istfict M<3nag£r, •Sup'cr.a Complex, Station 'oad, Durg (Oihattisgw'h}. •Seneraj (h'.R.M.). Bank Corpora-te Center, C-10, '6' BIock, Bandra Kuria ComDiex. tandro (East). iViumbai (M.S.), t.nainriai c'um Alanaging Oif'ector', bena Bank Corporate Center, C-10, '$' BSock, Bandra Xurfa Comptex, Bonorc (East), .Mumbai Wi..S.\ r Artictes 226 & 227 of the Hon'b'e A<r. K. re with Ms. Sangeeta Mishr-o, o R 1, The petitioners are working in the Subordinate Cadre of the respon^enfs B«nk. The petitioners appeared in the examination for promotion from the Subordinate Cadpe to Cterica! Cadi-e, as per vacancies notified vide memo da+ed 21.9.2006 (^nnexure P-4) for different regions. 2. According to the Searned counsel appewirig for the petitioners, the petitioners obtain more than 40% marks as oer Ctass-IV of tlie ssSsction modaSities for being en'isted in the order of ffierit on the of niarks obtaining in the written test. The petitloners hwing not been deciared as and not shown in the order of fnerit on the of morks, have fiied this petition challengtng that the respondents have appointed the persons ^atnst those centres, wheve no voccncy was notified and the petitioners were not considered for appointment. The petitioners appited stion in ftaipur region the notified vacancies were '1 ^. {»..<A d,0 PUT on!y 6 persons wers decla'-ed and the patitioners though got 40% and 42% marks respsctiveiLy', but not dectered pcssed. Thus, 10 vocant posts remained un-fu!fi!!ed and the has been transferred to other rea'ons. I hwe heard len'ned counse! appearing for ths petitionere, this is not tht case of the petitioners that any other candidotes having Sesser morks than the petittoners have been promoted to the eiericoi cadr-e. Jhe mmn grtevaices of the petitioners is that the vacancies wai!abie at Raipur region must be filled-up first bafore accommodating othw from k other area who may f-iwe obtoined more mar'ks 1+ian the petitioner's, as per t-sr'ms of sett'ement dated 9.4.1992 urid'er Section 2 ^) of the Industrfai blsputes Ac*, 1947. Se'ectfon modalitfes is prescribed quoted here in undei"; "Jhe sha" hold wriftsn test for the purpose of promotion from subor'dinote wwe to elericat cadre. The candidates who are s'ecuring mlnimum quatlfy'ing marks in the written test i.e. 40% in case of Senera! Category ond 3570 in the case of Scheduted Castes/Scheduied Tribes Cotegorfes, wi!i be enllsted in the orelar- of merit on the of fflcirks obtaining in the wr-itten test. • In the number of candidates secunng the rninimum quutify,ing murks In the written test as specified above exceed the number- of vocancies identified os per pa!*o (2) of the Settlemsnt, condidates in ths order of mefit to the extent of vacmdes wiU be promoted. Post'mq of pmmotees will be u'ithin the State/Reqion." 4. The memo dated 21.9.2006 (Annexwe P-4) for promotfon from Subordinate Cad"e to C'erica! Cadre does not contemplafes promotion region-wise, The saffle provides for filting-up of 110 vacancfes wailable in al! t- the centres as in terms of Ppomotton PoSiqr' Settiement dated 9th ,4p"ji, 1992. Si'nce the promotion ia on ail India bc's'is, the eontention of the teamed counsel for the petitioners that candidates eligibte from Br'anches/Offices in Raipur region bs considered for promotion against vscancies avaifable at Raipur region on!y is not sustainable. The regions we,"e provided for the purpose of holding examlnation not for any other ^ The final me"it tist as pe" u"wiw dafed 30.12.2006 exure P-2) is not on the of rsqion but for the totc! 110 vacancies ovailablc in ciericat cadre of Deno Bank. The merit fist is annexed cs Annexure (A) to the memo dated 30.12.2CX36, which as under ond makes the position clear:- ".......... As per Sovt. ffuideiines, Bank has to provide reservafion in promotion and also to adopt post roster system for promotion from Subordinate Cudre to CSerica! Cadre when ttie eleinents of direct recruitment in clerica! cadre is less than 75%. Keeping in vieiw the afc-resaid facts, reservation has been ;nt of Indi-a for SC and ST candidates. Reservation for physically Handicapped employees has been provided ua pe" Sovernment of India guide!ines. Four vacanciss namely two for Orthopeadicaliy Handlcapped and one each fo" v'fsua!]*/ Handicapped and H8uring Handicapped respectively were earmapked. However, no eandidate quuiified under visually Handicapped and hearing handicapped category. Scheduied Caste, Scheduted Tribe and Physica'ly '"(mdicappsd provided as per guidelines prescribed by ©overnmentof Indi-; Candidates Dromotsd on their own mer'its hwe y&^n Si'svifvri us ©enet'alCctegory candidates. The iist of 110 successful candidates who qualified for prcrnotion to c'erical cadre is enciosed as .4nnexure (,4} - 84 ccsndtdates qualified for promotion under Seneral Category, Amexure (B) - 16 candidates qualiffed for promotion under Schedu'ed Caste Categor/, ,4nnexure (C) - 8 candidates qualified for promotion under Scheduled T"ibe Category and Annexure (D) - 2 candidates beionging to Phy'sicatly Handicapped Categoi'y alongwith n'aiting iist in the respeetive category in the order of Merit." The Supreme Court in the case of T.N. ^ff/€€/as^s^C/^ffSn 'nio (SOOO) 5 SCC 728 dosww^ as under;- "l8...........It is a we!!-settled principSe in service jur'isprudence that even when there ia a vacancy, the State is not to fiil up such vacancy nor is there any corresponding Fight v'ested in an eiigibte smployee to aem<md that such post be filied up. TTiis is becouse the decision to fill up a vactincy or not vests with the empbyer who for good reasons, be it administrative, sconomicaS o" pojjcy, can declde not to fill up such (3)....................." 7, -~» ^- In the matter of Of w. and (£005)3 SCC 618, the Supr-eme Court observed as under;- 14. A4erely because vacancies are notified. the S'tate is not obliged to fil' up alf the vocancies unless there is some pr'ovi'sion to the contrary in the app!icab!e r'ules. -lowever, there is no doubt fhat the decision not to fil! up the vucancies, has to be taksn bona fide and must the test of i-eosonabteness go ca not to fai! on the touchstone of ,4rticle 14 of the Constitutlon. Again, if the vacancies are pr-oposed to be filled, then the State is ob'iged to fili' them in accordance with merit from the !ist of the seiected candidates. Whether to fiS! up o" not to fil! up a post, is c polw, decision, and it i: infected with the vice of arbitfurtness, there is no scope for interferenee !n judic'a! review. (See 'in this eonnection 6ovt. of Orissc v. Marapragad Sta+e of Orisga v. Bhikar'i Charan SAuntia .)" Sabhash App'ying !aw enunciated -by the Supreme Court to fte fact of the s^'t' resent case, ttier-s is no merit in the case. 9. As a rssult and for the reasons stated her'einabove, this petition i: dismissed summari'y. Sd/- . Satish K.Agniliotri ., Jydge , la