JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Appellants are before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a
judgment and order dated 18.07.2006 passed by the Kerala High Court in
Writ Appeal Nos.2275, 2527 and 2622 of 2005 affirming the judgment
and order dated 7.9.2005 passed by a learned single judge of the said
Court.
(3.) Recruitment to the posts is made by the respondent No. 4
Commission.
A requisition was made for filing up of 214 posts.
Allegedly, the respondent No.2 approved only 208 posts. 201 vacancies
were filled up. Contending inter alia that the Respondent - Cooperative
Bank could fill 16 more vacancies, a writ petition was filed. A learned
single judge of the High Court opined that having regard to the approved
vacancy position, six more vacancies could be filled up and one vacancy
having arisen due to non-joining of the same could also be filled up. A
direction was, therefore, issued to fill up seven more vacancies. An intra-
court appeal was preferred thereagainst, which by reason of the impugned
judgment has been dismissed opining:
The vacancies already stand reported to the
Public Service Commission in implementation
of the interim order passed on 10.12.2004 and
this report shall be deemed to have been in
respect of the vacancies occurred before the
expiry of the list, limited to the vacancies
available.
There cannot have any dispute on
that. In Ext.P10, the Registrar had approved the
staff strength sanctioning only 208 posts of
clerk/cashier.
Out of that, only 201 are in
position.
Therefore, there are remaining 7
vacancies.
These 7 vacancies shall be taken as,
as mentioned above, reported before 31.12.2004
and the candidates shall be advised as if the
report had been received before the expiry of
the said date, following the appropriate ratio
and communal rotation as applicable to the
post.
As the Public Service Commission had
received the report regarding the Non Joining
Duty vacancy only on 10.5.2005, they need
consider it as one in respect of the vacancies
that had arisen after the expiry of the list.
When
the Registrar had sanctioned only 208 posts,
whatever be the resolution in Ext.R4(g) or the
contentions raised in the counter affidavit, the
bank is disabled from appointing persons any
more than what is contained in the order of the
Registrar.
Moreover, because of the
computerization of the branches and other
modern facilities introduced in the banking
business, necessarily there may be reduction in
the number of vacancies.
Therefore, the view
taken by the learned Single Judge to direct 7
vacancies to be advised, cannot be said to be
unjustified to invite interference in these
appeals. ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.