Supreme Court of India
Kashmiri Lal And Ors. vs State Bank Of Patiala on 9 February, 1988
Equivalent citations: AIR1989SC566, JT1988(1)SC293, (1988)IILLJ217SC, 1988(1)SCALE318, (1988)1SCC596, AIR 1989 SUPREME COURT 566, 1988 (1) SCC 596, 1989 LAB. I. C. 1012, (1988) 1 JT 293 (SC), 1988 (1) JT 293, 1988 (1) ATLT 290, 1988 (19) REPORTS 358, 1989 (1) BANKCLR 240, (1988) 2 LAB LN 587, (1988) 57 FACLR 843, (1988) 2 LABLJ 217, (1988) 1 SERVLR 671, (1988) BANKJ 218, 1988 SCC (L&S) 418, (1988) 1 BANKCLR 371
Bench: Ranganath Misra, S. Ranganathan
ORDER
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the dismissal of a writ petition by a Division Bench of punjab band Hariyana High court.
2. The appellant is an officer of the State Bank of patiala which is a subsidiary bank of the stste Bank of india. the respondent-Bank framed a set of Service regulations in 1979 under section 63 of the state Bank of india (subsidiary Banks) act, 1979 with a view to rationalizing the services w.e.f. 1.10.1979. Implementation of the scheme by the respondent-Bank under the regulation proceeded under a mis conception that the fitment contemplated by way of nationalisation was one of promotion. When the matter was originally heard, we had pointed out to counsel for the respondent-Bank that the scheme did not provide for promotion and all that was necessary was to carry out the appropriate fitment without anything more. It is not disputed that on 1-10-1979 there were 178 posts to which fitment was to be made out of the 430 officers keeping the basis of seniority in view. It is equally not in dispute that the appellant came within the limit of 178 officers in the seniority list. As such he became entitled to the benefit of fitment right from 1-10-1979 and the respondent-Bank was obliged to give him that fitment.
3. In view of this finding the appeal has to be allowed and the appellant has to be declared entitled to the benefit of fitment with effect from 1.10.1979. This appeal is allowed with the direction that by 31.3.1988 the respondent - Bank shall make the appropriate order giving the benefit of fitment contemplated in the schedule under the Regulation. The appellant shall be entititled to costs of the proceedings both in the High Court as also here. Hearing fee of Rs, 2.000/- is granted.
4. In view of what has been stated above, no orders are necessary to be passed in the writ petitions.