Ankita vs Idbi Bank Ltd.
2018 Latest Caselaw 2230 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Date of Order: April 10, 2018

+                   W.P.(C) 3512/2018 & CMs 13847-48/2018
       ANKITA                                          ..... Petitioner
                             Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar,
                             Mr. Waseem Khan and Mr. Amique Khalid,
                             Advocates
                    versus

       IDBI BANK LTD.                                     ..... Respondent
                             Through:   Mr. Sumit Nagpal, Advocate
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                             ORDER

(ORAL)

1. Petitioner claims that in pursuance of Advertisement No.2/16-17 (Annexure P-1), petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Manager, Grade-A and as per the result declared, she had scored 90 marks out of 200 marks in the written examination and 44 marks out of 100 marks in the interview, but the reason put forth by respondent-Bank for non- selection of petitioner is "unsuccessful in interview". Learned counsel for petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to RTI reply of 22nd March, 2018, which reveals that the cut-off of final merit list for the post in question was 71.50 marks and petitioner had secured 134 marks. Petitioner further claims that she had made a Representation (Annexure P-7) to the General Manager (HR) of respondent-Bank stationed in Mumbai on 13th March, 2018, but to no avail.

2. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent to effectively consider petitioner's Representation (Annexure P-7) by passing a speaking order thereon, within a period of four weeks from today and its fate be conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.

3. With aforesaid directions, this petition and the applications are disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE APRIL 10, 2018 s