JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner who is an employee of respondent Central Bank of India Branch, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the Bank") has assailed the impugned Decision of the Bank dated 10.12.1993 conveyance to the petitioner through its counsel whereby the petitioner was informed that his promotion on the post of Junior Manager-Sub Accountant/J.M. Grade 1st shall remain provisional in view of the decion of the Addl. Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer dated 19.5.1992 in Civil Suit No. 10/1980 (68/79). 2. The grievance of the petitioner in short is that he was appointed as a clerk in the Bank w.e.f. 19.09.1969 and posted at Mandsor (M.P.) and was confirmed on the said post on 19.03.1970 vide Annexure 1 after the expiry of his probationary period. He was also intimated that he had been allowed to contribute to the Bank's Provident Fund Scheme. Thereafter the petitioner made a representation dated 11.7.1975 to the Management of the Bank for his transfer from Mandsor to Jaipur. The said request of the petitioner for transfer was duly considered by the Bank on 15.12.1975 and infact he was conveyed by the DIVISIONAL MANAGER of the Bank vide Annexure 11 that since the said transfer was being effected at his own request he will have to forego his claim for promotion for a period of three years and/or officiating chance for a period of 30 months from the date of his reporting at the Divisional Office, Jaipur. 3. Subsequently on 20.12.1975, the Bank introduced promotion policy wherein it was enjoined upon its employees that the request for consideration of respective candidates due for promotion to the next promotional post shall be considered only after completion of their 36 months of tenure of the place of transfer and subject to their qualifying the written test conducted by the Bank. 4. In pursuance of the aforesaid promotion policy, the petitioner on completion of requisite period of 36 months, was allowed to appear in the test for the post of J.M. Gr. I vide (Annexure 4) dated 1.2.1979 and (Annex.5) dated 3.2.1979 respectively provisionally. The petitioner qualified the written test on 12.2.1979 and he was given promotion as sub-Accountant on J.M. Gr. I scale. I vide (Annexure 4) dated 1.2.1979 and (Annex.5) dated 3.2.1979 respectively provisionally. The petitioner qualified the written test on 12.2.1979 and he was given promotion as sub-Accountant on J.M. Gr. I scale. The object of giving provisional permission to the petitioner to appear in the test of J.M. Gr.I was that pending the finalisation of decision of the Central Office of the Bank, the promotion given to the petitioner on the said post was provisional and in the event of the decision of the Management being adverse, the promotion of the petitioner was to be rescinded by the Bank. This fact was also conveyed to the petitioner vide the Bank's communication dated 4.6.1979 (Annex.10 and 11) respectively. 5. The reason for promoting the petitioner on the post of J.M. (Grade I) provisionally was on account of the civil suit having been filed by the employees of the Bank on the ground that the petitioner's name had been wrongly included in the list of promotee candidates. The petitioner's promotion on the said post was further made on officiating basis subject of his successfully completing the probationary period of six months. 6. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner made a representation to the respondent-bank for allowing him to appear in the next test on the basis of his position and seniority list dated 1.3.1979 in his representation dated 21.6.79 (vide Annexure 12) as well in subsequent representations but all to no avail. 7. Thereafter, vide (Annexure 16) dated 4.12.1981, the petitioner was given the benefit of increment on the part of J.M. Or. 1, while at same time vide (Annexure 17) dated 25.3.1992 the petitioner was informed that the said increments will be provided subject to recovery. Finally on 3rd November, 1993 vide (Annexure 23), the petitioner sent a registered notice for demand of justice through his counsel, which was duly served upon the Bank in which the petitioner requested the Bank to give him the benefit of regular promotion on the post of J.M. Gr.] so that his further promotional avenues may not be affected. He had also contended that he had continuously rendered about 14 years of service on J.M. Gr.l. 8. Failing to elicit any response from the respondents, the petitioner finally moved before this Court by any of instant writ petition on 24.1.1994. 9. He had also contended that he had continuously rendered about 14 years of service on J.M. Gr.l. 8. Failing to elicit any response from the respondents, the petitioner finally moved before this Court by any of instant writ petition on 24.1.1994. 9. The respondents on being noticed by this Court have filed their reply controverting the aforesaid contentions of the petitioner by contending intra-alia that although the Bank had promoted the petitioner on the post of J.M. Or. I but in view of the Civil suit filed by one Shri B.D. Bindal before the Addl. Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, the status of the petitioner was treated as Provisional and subject to the final decision of the civil court. 10. During the course of hearing, Shri B.C. Jain the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioner was allowed to take part in the promotion process and when he was found suitable for promotion, he was given the said benefit w.e.f.28.2.1979. With regard to order dated 19.5.1992 of the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, the learned counsel for the Bank contended that the civil Court had not upheld the validity of the promotional benefits given to the petitioner by the Bank, since he has not completed 36 months of tenure in service at the place of posting viz., Jaipur on his transfer from Mandsor and therefore, the provisional promotion given to the petitioner was bad in eyes of the law being contrary to the policies of respondent-Bank. 11. Learned counsel for the Bank had further contended that the Bank had preferred an appeal against the impugned order dated 19.5.1992 of the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, before the District Judge, Ajmer vide Civil Appeal No. 81/92 and the said Appeal is still awaiting the decision of the appellate authority and hence sub-judice. 12. During the course of hearing, I have been informed by the learned counsel for the parties that the learned District Judge, Ajmer, has not stayed the operation of the impugned order of the trial court and the appeal has not yet been heard and finally decided. It has been brought to my notice that a cross-appeal filed by Mr. B.D. Bindal, challenging the aforesaid order of the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, is also pending before the said appellate Court. 13. It has been brought to my notice that a cross-appeal filed by Mr. B.D. Bindal, challenging the aforesaid order of the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, is also pending before the said appellate Court. 13. In reply to grounds, the respondents have contended that the petitioner was given regular promotion on the post of J.M. Gr. I and as such it cannot be declared as bad in the eye of law. But, however, since the order of the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, is under challenge by the Bank before the learned District Judge at Ajmer, the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. On merits learned counsel for the Bank has contended that when the Bank itself has given promotion to the petitioner from the due date i.e. 28.2.79, he cannot claim promotion from subsequent date. 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the judgment of the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, as well as the legal position on the subject. Prima facie, I am of the opinion that once the respondents themselves had extended the promotional benefits of the petitioner, on the post of J.M. Gr. I and further allowed him to participate in the promotional process for the post of M.M. Gr. II and which fact is borne out from the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the Bank and since the petitioner had been declared qualified by the Bank in the written test in which the petitioner had appeared, it was not open to the Bank to challenge his promotion, on the post of J.M. Gr. I on extraneous considerations as referred to above. 15. I am further of the view that it was not open to the Bank by assailing his promotion on the aforesaid post of any other ground since he had also success.ally completed his probationary period and there was nothing adverse found against him by the management and hence he should have been treated as a confirmed employee on the post of J.M. Gr. 11 w.e.f. 28.2.79. 16. 11 w.e.f. 28.2.79. 16. I am further of the opinion that since the Bank has allowed the petitioner to participate in promotional process for the post of J.M. Grade II which is also borne out from the additional affidavit of respondents, he must be given a chance to be considered for the same and his candidature will be duly considered on merit. 17. I am also of the view that unless and until, the petitioner is treated as a confirmed employee on the post of J.M. Or. I, the question of his participating in the promotional process for the next higher post of M.M. Or. II, would not arise. The respondents should, therefore, immediately issue an office under declaring the petitioner a confirmed employee on the post of J.M.Gr. I and thereafter allow him to participate in the promotional process for the post of J.M. Grade II in accordance with law. 18. The Bank has not adopted a fair approach towards its' employee on account of its having treated the petitioner as not a confirmed employee on the post of J.M. Gr. I, since once having extended the promotional benefit to an employee to which he is entitled to the same on merit, it is not open to the Bank to challenge the same on one pretext or the other, since it results in creating discontentment amongst its' employees which is not proper. 19. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, with the direction to the petitioner to treat the petitioner as confirmed employee on the post of Sub-Accountant in the Scale of J.M. Gr. I w.e.f. 28.2.79 i.e. when he was actually promoted on the said post. The petitioner shall be further entitled to all consequential benefits as admissible to him in accordance with law from the said date and he will also be entitled to participate in the promotional process for next promotional post of M.M. Gr. II from the date he would be eligible to be considered for the same. The seniority list of the employees who were given promotion on the post of J.M. Gr. 1 and M.M. Gr. II from the date he would be eligible to be considered for the same. The seniority list of the employees who were given promotion on the post of J.M. Gr. 1 and M.M. Gr. II with effect from the date when the petitioner was given promotion on the said post i.e. 28.2.79 will not affect the future promotional avenues of the petitioner as admissible to him under the rules and the respondent-Bank would make proper placement of the petitioner in the scale of J.M. Gr. I as well as the Scale of M.M. Gr. II in accordance with the rules from the date when his immediate juniors were promoted on the said post. There will be no order as to costs. 20. Before parting with the case I would like to observe that it is not open to the employer to impose any such arbitrary condition on the employee that the view of acceptance of his request for transfer from one place to another he shall have to forego his promotion to the next higher post and because such a condition would have detrimental effect on the employee, since in the event of imposition of such harsh condition, no employee will feel safe to render his services to the employer besides it will also affect the efficiency of the employee in discharge of his duties to his employer. 21. With regard to the condition imposed by the Bank that petitioner's request for transfer from Mandsaur to Jaipur will be accepted subject to the condition that he will have to forego his claim for future promotions for a period of 3 years and/or officiating chance to the next higher promotional post for a period of 30 months from the date of his reporting,at the Divisional Office, which would obviously be harsh, unjust and unconscionable, I am of the considered opinion that such a harsh and arbitrary condition should not have been imposed by the Bank on the petitioner, since it has no nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the Bank and it would rather have detrimental effect on the employee besides would also impair his efficiency in service. It was further, open to the Bank either to accept the request of the petitioner for his transfer from Mandsaur to Jaipur or to have declined the same instead of imposing such condition on the petitioner. It was further, open to the Bank either to accept the request of the petitioner for his transfer from Mandsaur to Jaipur or to have declined the same instead of imposing such condition on the petitioner. I am further of the view that the criteria of promotion to the next higher post should be either on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, suitability-cum-merit or seniority in accordance with the rules but in any event it is not open to the management of the financial institutions like the Bank in the instant case to impose such arbitrary and harsh condition on the employee to forego his future promotions for a particular period as referred to above and this court will not hesitate in striking down such arbitrary condition and the same is accordingly stuck down. 22. Accordingly the order, dated 19.5.1992 passed by the Additional Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer in Civil Suit No. 10/1980 (68/79) whereby the petitioner was given provisional promotion on the post of junior Manager-cum-sub-Accountant/J.M. Or. I is quashed and set aside. Certified copy of the order dated 19.5.1992 passed by Additional Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer as tendered to this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of hearing be taken on the record.Order accordingly. *******