S.S. Sudhalkar, J. (Oral) - (1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 3.12.1999, copy annexure P/9, vide which he was not considered for promotion to the post of Clerk because he was not having the necessary working experience of five yeas in the Bank's service.
(2.) PETITIONER was working as Peon and the promotion he is seeking is to the post of Clerk. The rule specifying the eligibility for promotion is reproduced at Annexure P/7 and the relevant portion of the rule for promotion is as under : - "amongst Daftari; Peons/Drivers who have passed matriculation examination and have five years experience." Counsel for the respondent -Bank has raised a preliminary objection stating that because the petitioner did not have five years' working experience, he was rightly ignored for promotion. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner joined service in the year 1990 as Clerk, however, his services were terminated on 27.5.1994 and was reinstated on 9.1.999, and according to him, if this period is counted, then he was already eligible for promotion long back. He has argued on that the date of passing of the order, Annexure P/9, he was otherwise also eligible.
(3.) COUNSEL for the respondent argued that the petitioner being out of service from 27.5.94 to 9.1.1999 did not have the necessary working experience . Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the award of the Labour Court, Annexure P/4. Vide award the petitioner was ordered to be reinstated in service with full back wages. The award did not specify about continuity of service. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 6735 of 1999. By order dated 30.11.1998, the learned Division Bench in the said writ petition, held that the petitioner shall be entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service. During the course of hearing in that writ petition, the petitioner had made a statement giving up his claim regarding back wages if he was granted continuity of service, which was granted.;