S.P. Talukdar, J. - (1.) The Notification dated 14th November, 2007 issued by the Public Enterprises Selection Board, Department of Personnel & Training, being Annexure- 'P-5', is under challenge in the present application under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) The said notification relates to "Selection for the post of Director (Finance) in Bridge &. Roof Co. (I) Ltd. in Schedule 'C' scale of pay".
(3.) Grievance of the petitioners, as ventilated by learned Counsel, may briefly be encapsulated as follows: The petitioner No. 1 is the Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act petitioner No. 2 is an employee of the respondent No. 2. The petitioner No. 1 under its constitution is to espouse the cause and interest of its members, who are employees of the respondent company. It is concerned with the smooth functioning and development of the respondent No. 2 company. Petitioner No. 1 as per its constitution has the object to strive to ameliorate the stature of Bridge and Roof Company (India) Limited in order to improve the condition of its members by negotiation with the Employer/Management/Union of India and undertake legal proceedings for protection of the said purpose. There was a Notification dated 25th January, 2007 whereby the Deputy Secretary of the Public Enterprises Selection Board (hereinafter referred to as "PESB") apprised the respondent No. 2 that it was on the look out for a suitable candidate for the post of Director (Finance) for the respondent company No. 2. There was request to forward the names of willing eligible candidates seniority-wise, who were found suitable for the said post as per the requirements indicated in the job description along with their up-to-dale bio-data (in the prescribed form) within 30 days from the issue of that letter. By a notification dated 21st March, 2007, the under Secretary of the respondent No. 1 apprised the respondent No. 2 that the PESB would consider selection for the post of Director (Finance), Bridge and Roof Co. (I) Ltd. on 9th April, 2007 in the PESB Board room. A list of 19 candidates short-listed for the said post was enclosed. But it was found that by a subsequent notification dated 14th November, 2007 issued by the Deputy Secretary of the respondent No. 1, the PESB was looking out for a suitable candidate for the post of Director (Finance) in the respondent No.2 company. By letter dated 30th November, 2007, the Secretary of the Bridge and Roof Employees' Union invited attention of the respondent No. 4 to the advertisement in the website on 14th November, 2007. It was pointed out that selection for the post was already made by the PESB by way of empanelling two internal candidates of the company during April, 2007, Issuance of further advertisement and initiation of fresh interview for the same post was, thus, challenged and cancellation of the 'said Notification dated 14th November, 2007 was sought for. The petitioner No. 2 by letter dated 1st December, 2007, sought for the status of the result of the earlier selection process and the reasons for announcement of another notification in connection with filling up of the same post after elapse of about eight months. Despite repeated approaches, the respondent authority did not choose to respond. Initiation of fresh selection process by issuing notification without disclosing the result of the earlier selection process, thus, allegedly had a demoralizing effect on the concerned employees. It further reflected ulterior motive on the part of the respondent authority. Some members of the petitioner union participated in the selection process initiated on the basis of the earlier notification dated 21st March, 2007. The subsequent Notification dated 14th November, 2007 keeping such participants in dark with regard to the fate of the earlier selection process has, thus, been challenged on the ground that it is unfair, arbitrary, unreasonable and unjust. Thus, the petitioners approached this Court for redressal of their grievances by way of quashing the purported Notification dated 14th November, 2007.;