STATE BANK OF INDIA SCHEDULE CASTES/TRIBES EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, CHENNAI Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed by State Bank of India Schedule Castes/Tribes Employees' Welfare Association for issuing an appropriate writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondent bank from conducting interview for the selection to the post of Junior Management Grade Scale -I without properly constituting the Interview Committee.

(2.) The petitioner Association has been founded with the avowed purpose for protecting the interest of employees of the State Bank belonging to Schedule Castes/Tribes. For the purpose of promoting the employees in the rank of clerk to Junior Management Grade Scale -I written test was conducted by the respondent bank and on the basis of the result in the written test, about 245 employees including about 50 employees belonging to Schedule Castes/Tribes were called for the interview. The petitioner Association learnt that the Interview Committee had been constituted consisting of a Deputy General Manager, three Assistant General Manager and a Chief Manager and whereas a Deputy General Manager, three Assistant General Manager belonging to General Category had been nominated, only a Chief Manager belonging to SC/ST had been nominated to the Interview Committee. The grievance of the petitioner is that the aforesaid constitution of the Interview Committee is not in accordance with Clause 6.4 of the Brochure issued by the Central Government and at least a member of SC/ST in the cadre of Assistant General Manager should have been nominated instead of Chief Manager. It has been submitted that in the presence of senior officer such as Deputy General Manager and Assistant General Manager, a Chief Manager will not be in a position to raise his voice against any possible injustice against the candidates belonging to SC/ST and in accordance with clause 6.4 of the Brochure, an officer belonging to a higher rank should have been nominated.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein the contentions raised by the petitioner in the petition have been combated. It has been stated in the counter that since only few employees belonging to SC/ST community in the rank of Assistant General Manager were available within the Circle in question, a Chief Manager had been nominated in accordance with the administrative convenience. It has been further submitted that there is no hard and fast rule laid down in the brochure regarding nomination of an officer belonging to a particular ranky. It has been further submitted that final selection is to be made on the marks obtained in the written examination as well as experience, career of employees. It has been submitted that only 10 marks have been earmarked for the interview and keeping in view the low proportion of marks earmarked in the interview, no useful purpose would be served by directing fresh interview at this stage and the interview already held should not be disturbed.