Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1463 (KER)

Sachin K. (Employee Sr No. 90665) v. Indian Bank

2025-05-26

T.R.RAVI

body2025
JUDGMENT : The prayer in the writ petition is for quashing Exts.P13 to P18 to the extent they decline revision of final rank list and deny promotion to the petitioners. There is also a prayer for a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to more marks for the CBS Practical Test. The promotion is governed by Clause 3.1 of the settlement arrived at between the Management and the Employee Associations. Clauses 3.1 and 3.2 read as follows: “3.1 All the eligible Sub-staff employees who take part in the promotion process will have to appear for an Online Test and/or Written Test and a CBS Practical Test. The Online Test and/or Written Test will consist of Objective and/or Descriptive test in the subjects Basics of Banking and Practical Test on Computer Operations in CBS environment. 3.2 To qualify for promotion, an employee has to obtain minimum marks of 40% and above each in the subjects of Fundamentals of Banking and Computer operations in CBS environment. However, the minimum qualifying marks for SC/ST employees will be relaxed as per the Government of India guidelines to the extent of 5%. The promotions will be effected based on the rank list drawn on the basis of service seniority of those employees who have qualified in both the tests. The rank list on the basis of service seniority to the vacancies declared.” 2. It can thus be seen that as far as marks in the written test are concerned, all that is required is to qualify with 40%. Any additional mark will not in any manner help the candidate to secure a better position since the rank list is based on the seniority of persons who qualified with 40% marks. That is to say, the mere fact that a person scored higher marks would not by itself mean that he will be placed senior in the rank list. As long as persons with service seniority above the persons with more marks are available, they will be placed higher on the rank list. 3. The Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that even a revision of marks will not help the petitioners as the petitioners have all qualified with 40% marks and are entitled to be considered in accordance with their seniority. 4. 3. The Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that even a revision of marks will not help the petitioners as the petitioners have all qualified with 40% marks and are entitled to be considered in accordance with their seniority. 4. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that all backlog vacancies in the reserved category were filled up by the persons who are junior to the petitioners by retaining persons who are seniors. Such a contention is not available to the petitioners since the seniors in the rank list who are also reserved candidates are even otherwise entitled to be considered towards the merit quota. 5. There is a contention raised by the petitioners that out of the rank list, only 158 promotions were made even though there were 264 vacancies. The Senior Counsel submitted that the rest of the vacancies were for persons entitled to reservation. The above submission is recorded. 6. In the above circumstances, I do not think that the reliefs prayed for will give any particular benefits to the petitioners. It is also submitted that the next promotion process is underway and the petitioners have also participated in the said process. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners in the next promotion process, this writ petition is closed.