JUDGMENT 1. The selection of probationary officers made by the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) is the subject matter of challenge in this bunch of writ petitions. These shall stand disposed of vide this common order. i). The main grounds of challenge are; that as per condition No. 8, of the notification issued by the Bank, 8% of the vacancies were to be filled from amongst Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates. It is submitted that the Bank has exceeded this limit while making appointments. ii. That before publishing the select list, individual letters of appointment stood issued to the various candidates. iii. In writ petition 453/97, it is urged that the total number of marks given in the interview were 25 as against the total written marks of 175. It is submitted that this is in excess of the criteria indicated in the various judgments of the Supreme Court of India. iv. The petitioners were interviewed for 10 to 15 minutes only and this process was merely an eye wash. v. There was serious bungling in the matter of conducting examination. vi. In writ petition 1406/96, the additional plea sought to be urged is that the selection was not fair. vii. In writ petition 977/96, the point of view put across is that in the written examination was supposed to commence at 10a.m. but it commenced at 11.30 a.m. Thereafter the interviews were held. These are said to be held between 8th April, 1996 to 19th April, 1996. It is stated that there was leakage of paper also. viii. That there was only a single person who was conducting the interviews. ix. In SWP 16/97, in addition to the pleas which have been practiced above, it is stated that the questions which were put in the interview had nothing to do with the knowledge of banking law or banking system. The questions which are 5aid to have been asked and answered have been indicated in Annexure C to the writ petition. x. In SWP No. 112/97, it is stated that the petitioner was interviewed for 25 minutes; It is further stated that the petitioner was asked the questions which in no way were related to the banking system. This has been so stated in ground (iv) of the writ petition. It is also stated that there was leakage of paper. 2. x. In SWP No. 112/97, it is stated that the petitioner was interviewed for 25 minutes; It is further stated that the petitioner was asked the questions which in no way were related to the banking system. This has been so stated in ground (iv) of the writ petition. It is also stated that there was leakage of paper. 2. The only argument which has been put across by the petitioners in all the petitions is that condition No. 8 in the advertisement notice has been violated and candidates more than 8 percent belonging to SC/ST category have selected by examined. This is main thrust of attack in all petitions. As much stress has been laid on condition No. 8, it is being reproduced below:- 8% of vacancies shall be reserved for scheduled caste/scheduled tribe candidates." 3. It be seen that the clause noticed above in mandatory terms provides that there shall be reservation upto 8 percent in case of SC/ ST category. A plain reading of the aforementioned clause indicates that atleast 8% reservation was to be there in favour of the aforesaid category. The number is not to be less. If the number has exceeded that would not be hit by any statutory provision. As a matter of fact the reservation can go upto 50 percent of the total number of vacancies. As the selection under this category is within that limit i.e. less than 50%, therefore, the argument raised by the petitioners that only 8% reservation was there for SC/ST category cannot be accepted. What was mandatory was that there should be at least 8% reservation. If the Bank in the matter of making selection has exceeded by one or two posts in this regard, then this cannot be said to be in breach of notification, referred to above. 4. So far as other allegations regarding fixation of marks in the interviews are concerned, the Supreme Court of India in number of cases has held that these numbers can go even upto 50 percent. See the following decisions in Anzar Aheed v. State of Bihar AIR 1994 SC 141, where the allocation of 50% marks was for a written test and 50% for interview. This was upheld. In State of UP. vs. Rafiqudin, AIR 1988 SC 162 allocation of 35": of marks as minimum marks for qualifying in the viva-voce test was upheld. See the following decisions in Anzar Aheed v. State of Bihar AIR 1994 SC 141, where the allocation of 50% marks was for a written test and 50% for interview. This was upheld. In State of UP. vs. Rafiqudin, AIR 1988 SC 162 allocation of 35": of marks as minimum marks for qualifying in the viva-voce test was upheld. In Mehmood Alam Tariq v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1988 SC 1451, the Supreme Court of India again upheld 35% marks minimum qualification for viva voce. 5. In view of the above, it cannot be said that the marks which were allocated for the interview were on the higher side. 6. The argument that questions which were such which had nothing to do with the banking system cannot be accepted. The candidate seeking appointment in a bank must also be exhibit to general knowledge. The other contention depends on determination the question of fact. These cannot be gone into under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. These petitions as such are found to be without merit and are dismissed.