Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Sri Sailendra Nath Halder & Anr vs The Union Of India & Ors on 8 September, 2016

Author: Subrata Talukdar

Bench: Subrata Talukdar

                                               1

    109.
08.09.2016.
Ct. No. 29.
    F.B.

                                         W.P. 17215 (W) of 2016



                                         Sri Sailendra Nath Halder & Anr.
                                                        -Vs.-
                                             The Union of India & Ors.


                      Mr. Lakshminath Bhattacharyya
                                  ..... For the Petitioners.

                      Mr. Alok Kumar Banerjee,
                      Mr. Arunabha Sarkar
                                  ..... For the RBI.


                                                     _________

                      The    petitioners      are    represented      by    Sri   Lakshminath
              Bhattacharyya, Learned Counsel, who submits that the petitioners
              were found to be ineligible for promotion as Assistants in Class III
              category of the Reserve Bank of India (for short RBI) where the
              private respondent nos. 6 and 7 were found to be eligible. The

petitioners complain of discrimination on the point that both of them as well as the private respondent nos. 6 and 7 relate their qualification to a School Education Board Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh which is not a recognised Board.

On behalf of the RBI, Sri Alok Kumar Banerjee, Learned Senior Counsel appears and files written instructions. From the written instructions, this Court gets the distinct impression that the respondent-RBI has taken shelter under the plea of promoting the private respondents on the ground that their ineligibility could not be ascertained prior to the Online Promotional Examination of 2015 2 whereas, in the case of the writ petitioners they were found to be not only ineligible but also unsuccessful in the same examination.

Copy of the written instructions filed in Court today be kept with the record.

Having heard the parties and considering the materials on record, this Court grants Mr. Banerjee the opportunity to file a transparent List of Events and Facts demonstrating the acquisition of knowledge by the concerned respondent official(s) of RBI with regard to the fact that the ineligibility of the private respondents did not come to their knowledge prior to the examination of November, 2015.

Let an advance copy of such List of Events and Facts be handed over to the Learned Advocate for the petitioners.

Let the matter appear under the heading "Specially Fixed (Motions)" on the 22nd of September, 2016.

Liberty to communicate this order upon the non-appearing respondents.

(Subrata Talukdar, J.)