Mohan Prakash vs State Bank of Patiala and Sh. Kamal Thapa

Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge

Respondent-Bank invited applications for the appointment of permanent Part Time Sweeper on 1/3rd remuneration, vide Annexure P-1. According to the terms and conditions incorporated in Annexure P-1, candidate should have been registered in the nearby Employment Exchange. The advertisement was issued by the Branch Manager, State Bank of Patiala, Village Drawl, P.O. Karyali, Tehsil Suni, District Shimla. Petitioner and respondent No.4 submitted applications for considering their candidature for the post in question. They were called for interview. Petitioner secured 29.5% and respondent No.4 secured 34.5% marks. Respondent No.4 was offered appointment letter on 10.12.2008. Petitioner had earlier filed CWP No. 2435/2009. However, the same was withdrawn on 29.3.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

Mr. Dushyant Dadwal has strenuously argued that respondent No.4 was not registered in the nearby Employment Exchange. Thus, respondent No.4 was not eligible for appointment.

Respondent No.4 was proceeded ex parte. Respondents No.1 to 3 have filed the reply.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.

The terms and conditions enumerated in memorandum Annexure P-1 are mandatory. The candidate required to be appointed against the post of Permanent Part Time Sweepers on 1/3rd remuneration was required to be registered in the nearby Employment Exchange. The plea raised by Mr. Dushyant Dadwal that respondent No.4 was not registered in the nearby Employment Exchange has not been denied by respondents No.1 to 3. Their only case is that this condition was not mandatory. Respondent No.4 has been proceeded ex parte. Thus, there is no reply on his behalf. Respondent No.4 was not registered in the nearby Employment Exchange, i.e. State Bank of Patiala Branch Drawl. The terms and conditions provided in the advertisement are mandatory. His candidature could not be considered for appointment to the post of Permanent Part Time Sweeper. Thus, the appointment of respondent No.4 dated 18.11.2008 is illegal. Petitioner was at Sr. No. 3 of the merit list. Mr. Dushyant Dadwal submitted that number of posts are lying vacant in the respondent-Bank.

Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Annexure R-1 dated 18.11.2008 is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in case any post of Permanent Part Time Sweeper is lying vacant. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.