Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 114 (ORI)

SURENDRA KUMAR MOHAPATRA v. UNION OF INDIA

2014-02-12

SANJU PANDA

body2014
JUDGMENT : Sanju Panda, J. - As all these writ petitions involve common questions of law, the same are taken up for hearing together. For better appreciation W.P. (C) No. 6355 of 2012 is taken up first as the leading case. W.P. (C) No. 6355 of 2012 has been filed by the petitioners, who are working as Office Assistants in different branches of Neelachal Gramya Bank, Bhubaneswar challenging the arbitrary action of the opposite parties in giving promotions of Office Assistants (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre to Officer JMG Scale-1 Cadre under the Regional Rural Banks (Appointment and Promotion of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2010. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners on being duly selected were initially appointed as Junior Clerks and subsequently promoted to the post of Senior Clerks. In the year 2007 Puri Gramya Bank was amalgamated with Dhenkanal Gramya Bank and Neelachal Gramya Bank was created. Thereafter the posts of petitioners re-designated as Office Assistants (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical). After creation of Neelachal Gramya Bank on 30.8.2007 a provisional seniority list of the Office Assistants was prepared. The appointment and promotion of Officers and other employees of Rural Banks were governed under the Regional Rural Banks (Appointment and Promotion of Officers and other Employees) Rules, 1998. However, in the year 2010, the Central Government in exercise of its power u/s 29 of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 Rules called Regional Rural Banks (Appointment and Promotion of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 2010") superseding the Rules, 1998. Rule 8 read with Rule 11 of the Rules, 2010 empowers to prepare a guideline for recruitment and promotion to different categories of Officers and employees of Group 'A', 'B' and 'C posts by way of direct recruitment or promotion. For recruitment and promotion to the post of Officer Junior Management (Scale-1) under classification Group 'A' mode of appointment shall be 50 % by direct recruitment and 50 % by promotion from Group 'B'. The petitioners" belong to Group 'B' category holding the post of Office Assistant (Multipurpose). While matter stood thus, the Bank issued a notification on 11.6.2011 under Annexure-2 for promotion from the post of Office Assistant (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre to Officer JMG Scale-1 Cadre to fill up 97 vacant posts in accordance with Rules, 2010. The petitioners" belong to Group 'B' category holding the post of Office Assistant (Multipurpose). While matter stood thus, the Bank issued a notification on 11.6.2011 under Annexure-2 for promotion from the post of Office Assistant (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre to Officer JMG Scale-1 Cadre to fill up 97 vacant posts in accordance with Rules, 2010. As per the aforesaid notification, written test was conducted on 4.9.2011 and interview was conducted from 16.11.2011 to 19.11.2011. The petitioners were confident about their promotion as they are senior and they have unblemished service career but the authorities given promotion to their juniors basing upon their Performance Appraisal Report, though they have secured much less mark in the written test and interview. 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed by opposite party No. 4-Bank inter alia taking the stand that a person in his Performance Appraisal Report need not have any adverse remark but that does not necessarily mean that he is having all 'excellent' remark in his Performance Appraisal Report. The Bank as per the prevailing practice awarded marks, keeping the evaluation of the particular candidate's performance, different grades namely 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', and 'E' and these grades are awarded in order to facilitate the promotion process by converting the grades to numerical by the following procedure: Unit 'A' represents remarks given for 'outstanding' and taken as marks for 80 to 100, and since there is no clear cut/definite marks earmarked for such 'outstanding', remark, the average of 80 + 100 is taken as the base which comes to 90. And if a person has got 12 A's the said 90 is divided into 12 which comes to 7.5. Likewise 'B' represents for 'Good' and the base mark was 60 to. 80. 'C' represents 'Average' with the base mark of 40 to 60. 'D' represents 'Below Average' and has the base of marks of below 40. 'E' stands for 'Not Demonstrated' and base mark are 0' for this. Further it is stated that in view of Clause-11 (i) read with Clause 11 (iii) of Rules, 2010 a Committee constituted for the purpose of promotion. The said Committee recommended to the Appointing Authority the list of employees who are eligible to get promotion as per the aforesaid Rules, 2010 and there is no whisper about any action against the petitioners by-the Departmental Promotion Committee and promotion has been granted following the Rules, 2010. The said Committee recommended to the Appointing Authority the list of employees who are eligible to get promotion as per the aforesaid Rules, 2010 and there is no whisper about any action against the petitioners by-the Departmental Promotion Committee and promotion has been granted following the Rules, 2010. 4. On perusal of the records produced by learned Counsel appearing for opposite party No. 4-Bank, it appears that the Reporting Authority though awarded grades like 'A', 'B', 'C, 'D' and 'E' but the Reviewing Authority has not agreed with the same. On being asked learned Counsel for opposite party No. 4 submitted that as the Reviewing Authority is the superior authority, he has not agreed with the grades awarded by the Reporting Authority and he himself assessed the grades awarded by the Reporting Authority and reviewed the opinion of the Reporting Authority. Therefore, less mark has been awarded to the employees in view of the opinion of the Reviewing Authority. 5. Rules, 2010 stipulate that 50 % of the vacancies for promotion shall be filled under Normal Channel and 50% under Fast Track Channel as per eligibility and selection process given in the Rules. The eligibility criteria prescribed in the Rules is that promotion shall be made from amongst the employees holding full time regular post of Office Assistant (Multipurpose) and must have ten years experience. Relaxation in eligibility criteria of one year service also be given-to employees, who have passed Junior Associate of the Indian Institute of Bankers (JAIIB) of Indian Institute of Banking and Finance and one more year in case of such employees who have passed Certified Associate of the Indian Institute of Bankers (CAIIB) and the relaxation will be only once during the entire service period. The further condition is that the employee must have been confirmed in the feeder grade post. The employees should appear common written examination and interview. The selection be made on the basis of written test, interview and last five years Performance Appraisal Reports as per the division of marks given below: 6. Considering the above promotion Rules, 2010 and the Performance Appraisal Report, it appears that one Dinabandhu Dash has received 12 marks each in the category of 'A' for the years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10. Considering the above promotion Rules, 2010 and the Performance Appraisal Report, it appears that one Dinabandhu Dash has received 12 marks each in the category of 'A' for the years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10. Though he has received 12 marks in the category of 'A' by the authorities but he has only got 14.636 marks in the Performance Appraisal Report out of 30 marks. Similarly one Sanatan Das also received 12 marks each in the category of 'A' for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 and 12 marks in the category of 'B' for the year 2006-07, but he has got only 8.621 marks in the Performance Appraisal Report. Further one Ganeswar Barik received 11 marks each in the category of 'A' for the years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2010-11 and 10 marks for the year 2009-10 but he has got only 10.51 marks in the Performance Appraisal Report. So far as Harihar Jena is concerned, who has been given promotion have secured 27 marks out of 30 marks and his Performance Appraisal Report is available for two years and he has been awarded 27 marks each for those two years. 7. The original records produced by learned Counsel for the Bank reveals that there is no material before the Reviewing Authority to come to a different opinion than the grades awarded by the Reporting Authority. The Reviewing Authority also has not assigned any reasons whatsoever to defer with the grades awarded by the Reporting Authority. Accordingly, the procedure adopted by the opposite party No. 4-Bank to select the candidates for promotion of Office Assistants (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre to Officer JMG Scale-I Cadre was unfair, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. In view of the above, this Court while quashing the list under Annexure-3 prepared by opposite party No. 4-Bank for promotion of Office Assistants (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre to Officer JMG Scale-1 Cadre directs the said opposite party to reassess the Performance Appraisal Report of Office Assistants (Multipurpose Group 'B' Clerical) Cadre and prepare a fresh list for their promotion to Officer JMG Scale-1 Cadre with retrospective effect i.e. when the selection process was concluded earlier. While preparing such list opposite party No. 4 shall also consider the marks secured by the employees in the written test which was conducted by an independent organization. While preparing such list opposite party No. 4 shall also consider the marks secured by the employees in the written test which was conducted by an independent organization. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. Accordingly all these writ petitions along with misc. cases are disposed of. Final Result : Disposed Off