Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.113 of 2007 ====================================================== Chandrama Prasad Yadav, son of Deodhari Prasad Yadav, resident of Vilalge Sidhwal, Police Station Hussainganj, District Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Central Bank of India through Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office Pawapuri Vihar Bhagwanpur Cowk, Muzaffarpur 2. The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office near Head Post Office, Siwan 3. The Chief Manager, Central Bank of India, Panna Market,Siwan 4. The Branch Manager, D.A.V. College, Extension Counter Branch, Central Bank of India, Siwan ====================================================== .... .... Respondent/s Appearance :
Legal Reasoning
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate Mr.Sunil Prasad Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 5 07-05-2013 Heard the parties. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assailing the validity and correctness of order/communication dated 13.11.2006 (Annexure- 8), issued under the signature of the respondent Chief Manager of the Central Bank of India ( in short ‘Bank’), whereby the request of the petitioner to forward his name for the purpose of holding his interview for his selection/appointment on Class IV post by the respondent Bank and its functionaries has been rejected. 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.113 of 2007 (5) dt.07-05-2013 2 / 5 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as temporary employee for working as water man or Safai Karmchari on 10.7.1995 in D.A.V. College Extension Counter of Panna Market Branch, Siwan of Central Bank of India. It is the admitted case of the parties that the petitioner is no longer in service of the respondent Bank with effect from 2.4.2003 i.e. for last ten years. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent Chief Manager of the Bank wrote a letter dated 9.9.2001 (Annexure-1) to the respondent Regional Manager of the Bank requesting him to furnish the list of such part time Safai Karmchari and Sub-staff, who have completed 240 days of continuous service within a period of one year, so that their names may be forwarded to the Central Office for the purpose of holding interview for their selection on regular Class IV post. The petitioner claims that he had completed 240 days of continuous service during the year 2000-2001, therefore, his name ought to have been forwarded for the purpose of allowing him to participate in the interview. It is also the case of the petitioner that since his name was not being forwarded for allowing him to participate in the interview, he approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in C.W. J.C. No. 14243 of 2003, which was
Decision
finally heard and disposed of by a Bench of this Court by an order dated 5.4.2005 (Annexure-5) with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner and calculate his actual working period during one year and, thereafter, necessary order was directed to be passed by taking into consideration the materials produced by the petitioner. 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.113 of 2007 (5) dt.07-05-2013 3 / 5 In the light of the aforesaid order dated 5.4.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 14243 of 2003 (Annexure-5), the petitioner filed his representation on 28..4.2005 (Annexure-6), whereafter, actual number of days of work of the petitioner as part time Safai Karmchari was calculated for the period from 13.7.2000 to 12.7.2001 i.e. for one year. Calculation chart prepared by the Chief Manager has been brought on record as Annexure-7 to the writ petition. Since the petitioner could not fulfil the required 240 days of continuous service for the purpose of recommendation of his name for interview, therefore, by the impugned order/communication dated 13.11.2006 (Annexure-8), name of the petitioner has not been recommended, and his claim has been rejected. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has vehemently argued that calculation made by the respondent Bank regarding actual working days of the petitioner is not correct, therefore, the impugned order/communication is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is claimed that the petitioner was asked to work as part time employee in the name and style of Mohan Ram, and therefore, even that period should have been counted by the Bank for computing the period of 240 days. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Bank and its functionaries has opposed the prayer and has submitted that on the basis of official record of the Bank, calculation was made and it was found that in one particular year the petitioner had not discharged his duties for 240 days as part time Safai Karmchari, therefore, his name was not recommended for the purpose of holding interview. It is also contended that the petitioner has not been able to show that he has acquired any legal 4 Patna High Court CWJC No.113 of 2007 (5) dt.07-05-2013 4 / 5 right, which has been violated by the Bank and its functionaries. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed by him. It is next contended that the petitioner is no longer in service of the Bank even as a part time Safai Karmchari with effect from 2.4.2003. Therefore, it is submitted that at this belated stage, his claim cannot be considered and is fit to be rejected particularly in absence of violation of any provisions of any statutory rules of the Bank or Circular issued by the respondent Bank having statutory force. After having heard the parties, and on consideration of the materials available on the record, this Court finds that the claim made on behalf of the petitioner is based on disputed questions of fact. Admittedly, the petitioner had moved this Court earlier in C.W.J.C. No. 14243 of 2003 for almost similar and identical reliefs, which was disposed of by an order dated 5.4.2005 (Annexure-5). In the light of the aforesaid order and direction dated 5.4.2005 (Annexure-5) passed by this Court, fresh calculation was made by the respondent Bank, whereafter it was found that during the relevant period of one year the petitioner had not completed 240 working days of continuous service as part time Safai Karmchari. Further this Court finds that the petitioner is no longer in service of the respondent Bank even as part time Safai Karmchari for last ten years. For the reasons recorded above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order/communication dated 13.11.2006 (Annexure-8). Consequently, there is no question of issuing any direction to the respondent Bank for allowing the petitioner to participate in the interview for the purpose of his selection on Class IV post on regular basis. 5 Patna High Court CWJC No.113 of 2007 (5) dt.07-05-2013 5 / 5 In the result, the application has to fail and, is accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Kanth/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)