All India Ex-Servicemen Bank ... vs The Chairman, State Bank Of India ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 1794 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+                         WP(C) No.2533/2013

%                                                        April 22, 2013

ALL INDIA EX-SERVICEMEN BANK EMPLOYEE‟S FEDERATION
(REGD.)                                ..... Petitioner
                  Through: Mr. S.M. Tripathy, Advocate.

                          versus

THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Vikas Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate and Sh. Rajiv Kapur, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA


To be referred to the Reporter or not?        Yes


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner-All India Ex-

Servicemen Bank Employee‟s Federation (Regd.) seeking the reliefs that

three candidates as stated in the writ petition be permitted to appear in the

written examination scheduled to be held on 21.4.2013 and 27.4.2013 on

clearing of which the person would be qualified for promotion to Officer

WP(C) No.2533/2013 1 of 6 grade. There is also a related prayer for implementation of the notifications

dated 2.4.1992 and 10.10.1994 issued by the Central Government which

provide for age relaxation for securing appointment in the higher post.

2. At the outset it must be stated that in my opinion the writ

petition as framed is clearly not maintainable because if some persons want

to appear in the examination it is those persons who must approach the

Court. These persons have not approached the Court. There are no

affidavits filed by the three persons for whose benefits the writ petition is

said to be filed and nor is the writ petition itself signed by these persons.

The present petition filed by an association therefore cannot lie inasmuch as

there is no reason given as to why three petitioners cannot approach the

Court for the reliefs as claimed for in the writ petition. The rights claimed

are personal to persons claiming them and who should have themselves filed

the writ petition. The writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed on this

ground alone.

3. Even assuming that the writ petition is maintainable, on merits

the writ petition is liable to be dismissed because there is no policy of the

Central Government for granting of age relaxation to ex-servicemen so far as

promotion is concerned. Learned senior counsel for the respondent Nos.1

WP(C) No.2533/2013 2 of 6 and 2 do not dispute that the government guidelines given from pages 12 to

14 of the paper book apply to the respondent Nos.1 and 2, however, it is

stated that by the very language of these notifications, the same apply only

to fresh appointments and not for promotions. For the purpose of

convenience, the relevant notifications and the relevant portion of extant

promotion policy are reproduced as under:-

"I.) (5) Relaxation admissibly only for the first civil employment.- It has been decided that once an ex-serviceman has joined the Government job on civil side after availing of the benefits given to him as an ex-serviceman for his re-employment, his ex- serviceman status for the purpose of re-employment in Government ceases. On his joining the Civil employment, he is deemed to be a civil employee and will be entitled to only such of the benefits like relaxation of age, etc., as admissible to Civil employees in the normal course in accordance with the existing instructions in this regard, subject to other conditions governing the grant of such benefits. The above provisions shall not apply to those Ex-servicemen who have been re-employed or employed by Private Companies/Autonomous Bodies/Public Sector Undertakings/Government Offices on casual/contract/temporary/ad hoc basis and who can be removed from such service at any time by their employer concerned.

II) (6) Age relaxation as admissible to Ex-servicemen will be admissible for securing another higher Civil appointment.- In modification of provision of his Department‟s O.M. No.36034/27/84- Estt. (SCT), dated 2-5-1985 (Order (5) above), it has been decided that such of these ex-servicemen candidates who have already been secured employment under the Central Government in Groups „C‟ and „D‟ will be permitted the benefit of age relaxation as prescribed for ex- servicemen for securing another employment in a higher grade or cadre in Groups „C‟ and „D‟ under the Central Government. However, WP(C) No.2533/2013 3 of 6 such candidates will not be eligible for the benefit of reservation for ex-servicemen in Central Government jobs.

III) Dated the 10th October, 1994 Subject: Benefit of age concession to ex-servicemen who have already joined Government service for applying for employment in a higher post/service under the Central Government.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department‟s O.M. of even No dated 2.4.92 wherein it was decided that such of those ex- servicemen candidates who have already secured employment under the Central Government in Group C and D, would be permitted the benefit of age-relaxation as prescribed for ex-servicemen for securing another employment in a higher grade or cadre in Group C and D under the Central Government.

2. The question of extending this concession to Group A and B posts has been under the consideration of the Government. It has now been decided that those ex-servicemen who have already secured regular employment under the Central Government in a civil post would be permitted the benefit of age relaxation as admissible for ex-servicemen for securing another appointment in any higher post or service under the Central Government. However, such candidates will not be eligible for the benefit of reservation, if any, for ex-servicemen in Central Government jobs.

3. The above decision is in modification of the provisions of this Department‟s O.M. No.36034/27/84-Estt (SCT) dated 2.5.85.

4. Ministry of Finance etc. are requested to bring the contents of this O.M. to the notice of all concerned.

(BHAVANI THYAGARAJAN) DIRECTOR (JCA)

IV POLICY FOR PROMOTION FROM CLERICAL TO JMGS-1- NORMAL-CUM-SENIORITY CHANNEL

V GENERAL (APPLICABLE TO PROMOTION UNDER ALL CHANNELS)

VI (vii) The concessions/relaxations available to SC/ST employees WP(C) No.2533/2013 4 of 6 etc for out-of-cadre promotions for promotion in terms of Government/IBA guidelines, as applicable form time-to-time will be adhered to. However, if any doubt regarding any concession/relaxation on interpretation arise/to be made, the matter will be referred to Government of India/IBA and their advice will be final and binding on both the parties. Concession available to Ex- Servicemen employees etc as per Government guidelines will continue to be available."

4. A reading of the aforesaid notifications/documents shows that

there exist applicable notifications/circulars of the Central Government with

respect to age relaxation for joining of civil employment by ex-servicemen

as also for appointment to posts in Group 'C' and 'D' as also to Group 'A'

i.e the age relaxation is for final employment/appointment. On behalf of

respondent Nos.1 and 2 it is rightly contended that these

notifications/circulars are only with respect to fresh appointments and the

expression promotion is conspicuous by its absence in the aforesaid

notifications and circulars issued by the Central Government. It is therefore

rightly argued that age relaxation will be available but only for employment

in either Group A post or Group C and D posts or any other first civil

employment but not with respect to promotions.

5. Stress is laid on behalf of the petitioner to paragraph (vii) which

has been reproduced above for contending entitlement to age relaxation for

promotions. The respondents contend the said para to be not applicable for WP(C) No.2533/2013 5 of 6 promotion so far as petitioner/ex-servicemen are concerned and only being

applicable to SC/ST employees, however, for the sake of arguments I am

presuming that the said policy also applies, however, at best the said policy

would only make the notifications of the Central Government applicable but

the notifications provide for appointment and not promotion and petitioner

in the present case are not giving up their appointments in the existing post

for seeking appointments to group C and D posts but are effectively seeking

promotion through proper channel by appearing in examination for

promotion to the Group A posts.

6. In view of the above, there is no merit in the writ petition,

which is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

                                             VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
APRIL 22, 2013
Ne




WP(C) No.2533/2013                                                 6 of 6