JIND CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK EMPLOYEES UNION, JIND Vs. JIND CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD , JIND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner-Union for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to promote the Secretaries of respondent No. 1 to the posts of Clerks/Cashiers against the quota fixed for promotees and further to direct the respondents not to fill the quota of the promotees from amongst Clerks by direct recruitment. It has been pointed out that vide order dated 15.7.1986, this Court had passed the following order in Review Application No. 34 of 1986 in C.W.P. No. 2004 of 1986 :-

(2.) It has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that C.W.P.No. 1212 of 1982 which was again filed by the Employees' Union, Jind, wherein the selection of Clerks was made on direct quota allegedly over and above the quota which the direct recruits could in any case hold as per the rules, came up for hearing before this Court on 27.7.1988 when the following orders were passed :-

(3.) On the basis of said submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner- Union contends that a direction is already there by a Division Bench of this Court by way of Mandamus that the Bank shall maintain the ratio of 3:1 between direct recruits and the promotees in the cadre of Clerks. He submits that in the replication filed by the petitioner, a specific averment was made that 7 posts which were to be filled were lying vacant in the quota of Secretaries and, therefore, 7 people were required to be promoted from the Secretaries' quota and it was on the basis of this submission that the order dated 15.7.1986 reproduced above has been passed. Counsel for the Bank also accepts this contention that the said order was passed in the light of the replication filed by the petitioner. It has been brought to the notice of the Court that during the interregnum, the respondent-Bank had in accordance with the order of this Court, passed resolution No. 6 dated 20.4.1987 wherein the Board of Directors and respondent No. 1-Bank had promoted 7 persons who were Secretaries. However, counsel for the petitioner states that 2 of the said persons are Selection Grade Secretaries. He states these two persons do not belong to the Secretaries cadre and therefore, have been probably wrongly promoted by the Bank. However, he submits that he would be satisfied if this resolution is given effect to despite of the word "provisionally" incorporated therein. He says so on the ground that the selection of Zile Singh, Selection Grade Secretary and Gaze Singh, Selection Grade Secretary is not under challenge in this writ petition. It goes without saying that if resolution No. 6 dated 20.4.1987 passed by the Jind Central Bank Limited, Jind, is in accordance with the order passed by this Court in C.W.P. No. 1212 of 1982 decided on July 27, 1988, the same cannot be said to be in violation of the Rule and would, therefore, be in consonance with the order passed by this Court and for all intents and purposes would be permanent in nature and the word "provisionally" was only an addendum word, simply in compliance with the order passed by this Court which has said that such promotions shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition.