M.L.Bhat - (1.) THESE three writ petitions raise a common question of law and fact. Therefore, these are decided by a common judgment.
(2.) IN order to appreciate the controversy raised in the writ petitions, it is necessary to give brief resume of the facts as set out in the writ petition. The writ petitioners of writ petition No. 2807 of 1989 has appeared in a written test conducted for the post of probationary officers in Bidur Gramin Bank. The said posts were advertised in pursuance of the advertisement notice. The written test is said to have been conducted at Bijnor on 6-4-1986 and the result of the same was published on 30-5-1986. The result is contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The petitioner's name was included in 90 candidates who were declared eligible for appearing in the interview for the post of the probationary officers. Date of interview was to be notified separately. The petitioner was informed that the written test has been cancelled by the Bank at the back of the petitioner. It is stated by the petitioner that the vacancies for filling up the post of probationary officers were to be filled up for the year 1985. At the end of December, 1985 a notification is said to have been issued that the process for recruitment may be completed if the advertisement for filling up the post was made before 1 -1 -86. This is reflected by Annexure-3 to the writ petition. It is stated that there is no justification for cancelling the result of the written test. The process of selection has been deferred deliberately. It is stated that there are still nine vacancies for the post of probationary officers which is evident by Annexure-4. In writ petition No. 18941 of 1988, the petitioners stated that in a terms of advertisement notice dated 14-5-1985 amongst other posts 30 posts of probationary officers were to be filled up by Bidur Gramin Bank, Bijnor. The petitioners being eligible submitted applications and on the basis of the advertisement notice, written test was conducted at Bijnor on 6-4-1986. The result of the written test was declared on 30-5-1986. Among 90 candidates who were declared eligible for interview, the petitioners figured as eligible candidates for being interview, but the petitioners were not interviewed. They were informed that the examination held on 6-4-1986 has been cancelled. The posts are said to have been advertised for there were vacancies in the year 1985 which were required to be filled up. The posts of probationary officers could be filled up by promoting field supervisors if they had five years' experience as Field Supervisors in the Bank. The Bank was established 1983. Therefore, the Field Supervisors were not eligible for being appointed in 1985 and thereafter, or about three years. On 26-12-85 repondent No. 1 is said to have issued a telegram to the Regional Bank to the effect that after 26th December, 1985, Government of India has decided that recruitment of officers, Field Supervisors and clerks will be done by Banking Service Recruitment Board and no advertisement shall be issued for recruitment of the said posts w e.f. 1-1-86. In case of advertisement issued before 1-1-86 the process of recruitment may be, completed under the existing arrangement. However, minimum staff were to be recruited to meet the immediate requirement only. On the basis of the aforesaid telegram it is stated that advertisement in the present case was issued on 14-5-85 when the process of selection had commenced and that the process was to be completed. The written test could not be cancelled. In cancelling the written test, the respondents have stated that the Government of India had not permitted the Regional Rural Bank (Bidur Gramin Bank) to recruit the supervisory staff in the year 1987. Therefore, the examination conducted in 1985 was cancelled. However, the petitioners have assailed the reasons given by the respondents for the cancellation of the examination. It is stated that the vacancies were in existence from 1985 to 1986. Moreover, the process of selection was completed in pursuance of advertisement notice dated 14-5-85. Therefore, the reasoning given by the respondents for cancellation of the written test is untenable. Most of the petitioners are said to have become over-age and they can not sit in any other competition. Therefore, the act of the respondents is said to be unjust and bad in law. Nine posts of probationary officers were available. It is stated that despite the posts having been available, result of the examination conducted in 1985 has been cancelled. Cancellation of the result is said to be arbitrary and illegal. No irregularity was committed by the petitioners in 1985 when their written test was taken, therefore, on the basis of that written test they were entitled to be called for interview and considered to the available vacant posts.
(3.) ON the basis of the aforesaid facts it is prayed that cancellation of the written test ordered on 29-1-88 may be quashed. Respondent No. 4 may be directed to process the interview for the posts of Probationary officers and after interviewing the petitioners, their results may be declared. The posts of probationary officers may not be filled up and the respondents may be directed to consider ihe petitioners for the posts. In their counter, the respondents have stated that the Bidur Gramin Bank was constituted by the Punjab National Bank as Sponsor Bank in exercise of powers conferred by it under Section 3 of the Regional Rural Banks Act 1976. The Regional Rural Bank, being constituted, is to comply, and be guided by, such directions as may be given by the Central Government after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India.;