JUDGMENT
K.M. Mehta, J.
1. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or directions to the respondent-the Secretary, Banking Service Recruitment Board to give benefit of reservation of 14.5% to ex-servicemen and further be pleased to direct the respondent Board to fill up those posts from ex-servicemen in the interest of justice.
2. The brief facts giving rise to this petition is as under.
2.1. On 8th March, 1983, the petitioner joined Indian Army services on the post of Combatant Clerk and was came to be posted with Corps ‘A’ Military Police Units located all over India. During his service the petitioner served the Indian Army at various places which includes Kamptee (Maharashtra), Aurangabad, Bangalore, Jansi, Tejpur, Akhnoor, Chandigarh etc. The petitioner, on completion of pensionable service, over 15 years, has retired from the service on 31st August, 1998. The petitioner has produced no objection certificate issued by the Administrative Officer, Bangalore, which has been produced at Annexure ‘A’ to the petition. The said certificate provides that the petitioner had retired from 1st September, 1998 and the authorities have no objection, if the individual can appear in the examination for Clerical Post in Public Sector Banks.
2.2. On 3rd July, 1998 an advertisement came to be published by the Banking Service Recruitment Board (hereinafter referred to as the ‘respondent-Board’) inviting applications for vacancies of various posts. It has been stated in the advertisement that the written test will be held on 11th October, 1998. The petitioner made an application for the post of Clerk. The said advertisement has been produced at Annexure ‘B’ to the petition. The said advertisement stated that there will be reservation of 39 posts for Scheduled Caste (SC), 81 posts for Scheduled Tribe (ST) and 153 posts for other Backward Class (OBC) candidates. The said advertisement also provides that ex-servicemen who have passed in Services (Departmental) Examination which are recongnised as equivalent to Civil Examination not below the level of matriculation are also eligible to apply.
2.3. Pursuant to the said application, the respondent-Board had sent a call letter to the petitioner. The said call letter for written test has been produced at Annexure ‘C’ to the petition. It has been further stated that as the petitioner successfully cleared the written test conducted by the respondent-Board, the petitioner was called for personal interview by a letter dated 25th January, 1999. The said letter has been produced at Annexure ‘D’ to the petition.
2.4. On 24th February, 1999, the petitioner appeared for personal interview at Ahmedabad, wherein during a period of 45 minutes various questions on different subjects were asked to the petitioner and after satisfaction of the Board reply was given. It can be said that the petitioner positively completed the personal interview and there was no reason for the petitioner not to expect the job. However, the respondent-Board published a list of selected candidates on 30th March, 1999, in which, number of the petitioner was not there. The said selection list has been produced at Annexure ‘E’ to the petition.
2.5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said action of the respondent-Board, the petitioner submitted that the respondent-Board has issued the said list of selected candidates, ignoring the case of the petitioner that he has being an ex-servicemen. He submitted that there is a fixed quota for ex-servicemen, which has been ignored by the respondent-Board. The petitioner submitted that the idea behind reservation for ex-servicemen is not only to provide employment to ex-service personnel but to adopt discipline, well-mannered, law abiding, efficient person and considering the facts that after serving the Nation at the cost of the personal life and by residing away from the society much has been done by a soldier and with a view to show respect to their sincere and honest services, the Central Government gave mandate and provided 14.5% reservation for Group ‘C’ post for which the present petitioner applied. It has been stated that the Board has not considered the reservation quota of 14.5%. It has been stated that only two persons are selected from Scheduled Caste-Scheduled Tribe and two persons are selected from OBC and no one is selected from General Category ex-servicemen which is nothing but arbitrary, malafide and contrary to the Government reservation policy.
2.6. It was further submitted that out of 324 posts only four posts are filed up from ex-servicemen without appointing any candidate from General Category ex-servicemen and looking to the percentage of reservation atleast 45 seats approximately are required to be filled in from ex-servicemen while four posts are filled in and other 41 posts are vacant for ex-servicemen but for the reasons best known to the respondent-Board inspite of the fact that the petitioner is available on general category / ex-servicemen reservation appointment has not been given. He has further submitted that approximately 60% to 70% out of 525 candidates are selected and chosen from State of Bihar. In view of the same, the reservation quota of ex-servicemen of General Category is also taken away and not a single person is selected in the said selection list and hence the present petition has been filed by the petitioner.
3. The present petition is filed on 30th June, 1999. When this Court issued notice on 5th July, 1999 and, thereafter, the same was admitted on 17th August, 1999.
4. Mr.Gohil, learned Advocate for the petitioner has made aforesaid submissions on behalf of the petitioner. Submissions on behalf of the petitioner :-
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that when there is reservation provided by the Central Government of 14.5% and from General Category ex-servicemen quota, no one is selected and only five persons are selected which includes two SC candidates and two OBC candidates then what basis the Secretary has submitted that the reserved category candidates are selected on the basis of the merits for the number of vacancies reserved for each category. On the basis of 14.5% reservation approximately 45 seats are required to be filled up by selecting ex-servicemen but only four persons are selected and, therefore, the affidavit filed by the respondent-Board is false and, therefore, the petition is required to be allowed.
6. He further submitted that in the present case, the respondent-Board has filled up all the reserved seats by selecting SC on 27 posts, ST on 65 posts and OBC on 84 posts and only five ex-servicemen are selected where two ST candidates, one ST candidate and two OBC candidates and no one is selected from ex-servicemen General Category. Therefore, the reservation which is provided for ex-servicemen which is of 14.5% is not followed in the selection list in question and, therefore, it is arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the reservation policy and, hence, the petition is required to be allowed. As against that the respondent-Board has also filed a rejoinder.
7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the President, enacted ‘Ex-servicemen (Re-Employment in Central Civil Services and Posts) Rules, 1979’, Gazette Notification published on 15th December, 1979 in that 10% of the vacancies in Category of Group ‘C’ posts and of each post in Group ‘C’ service reserved under Rule 4. He submitted that vide letter dated 20th March, 1980, Government of India (Banking Division) decided to make such reservations for ex-servicemen on a permanent basis at the rate of 10% in Clerical (Group ‘C’) cadres. He submitted that vide letter dated 9th June, 1980, the Board has increased the reservation @ 14% on permanent basis and by letter dated 11th May, 1988, he further increased the reservation @ 14.5%.
8. He submitted that the President made ‘Ex-servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Services and Posts Amendment) Rules, 1986’ by publishing Gazette Notification of 1st March, 1986. He submitted that Rule 6A for ‘Lower Standard for Selection’ for ex-servicemen to make deficiency in the reserved quota.
9. He submitted that the consequent to the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling on 27% reservation provided to OBC category, Government of India, clarified vide their letters dated 1st December, 1994 and 24th August, 1995 that the percentage of reservation for ex-servicemen should remain the same as at present, that is to say that there is no change to reservations catered for the ex-servicemen.
10. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon paragraph 3.10 of ‘Hand-Book on Resettlement of Ex-servicemen’ published by Director General Resettlement, Ministry of Defence, published in 1995, which is clearly states the facts enumerated above.
11. He has pointed out that para 1(B)(a) of the Proforma, appended as Appendix-VII to the Government of India (Banking Division) letter of June 1997 clearly states that current reservation with regard to ex-servicemen is 14.5%. Paragraph 2 on the reserve side of the Proforma, clarifies that the reservation for ex-servicemen is horizontal reservation and these vacancies are part of the total indent for General, SC, ST and OBC. Paragraph 3 on the same page, states that not more than 50% of the total number of vacancies in a year would be reserved for all categories, namely, SC, ST & OBC. Further, paragraph 4 on the same page No.2, explains that reservation for ex-servicemen will be provided from amongst the community they belongs to SC/ST/OBC or General Category, he should be adjusted against one of the vacancy earmarked for that category so that, the total reservations should not exceed of 50% of the total vacancies.
12. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon paragraph 4 of ‘Citizen Charter’ published by Director, Soldiers’ Welfare and Resettlement, Gujarat State, which also clarified the facts cited above.
13. Mr.Darshan Parikh, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent-Board has relied upon the affidavit filed by one Shri Bharatkumar R. Jani, Secretary, Banking Service Recruitment Board. He has submitted that the Board is entrusted, inter alia, with the task of identifying clerical cadre personnel for recruitment in Public Sector Banks for the vacancies in their branches / offices located in the State of Gujarat and others Union Territories. The board has to keep various guidelines of the Government with regard to reservation of SC/ST/OBC/Orthopaedically handicapped (OH) and ex-servicemen candidates. He further submitted that not more than 50% of the total vacancies in a year would be reserved for all categories, viz. SC, ST, OBC, OH and ex-servicemen. It has been submitted that out of total 525 seats, 37 for SC, 81 for ST, 147 for OBC, 5 for OH and 6 for Ex-servicemen. He submitted that the grievance of the petitioner are not genuine and cannot be ventilated in accordance with law.
14. He has submitted that the Board is an agency which as per the requirements of the public sector banks proceeds to hold written examination for all eligible applicants. The recruitment for clerical cadre is done on the basis of written test (total 200 marks) followed by interview (total 35 marks) of merit-listed candidates. In addition candidates for the posts of typist and stenographer have to qualify in the skill test for which required number of candidates are called on the basis of merit list of written test. The final selection of candidates for appointment in the Banks is done strictly on merit, on the basis of the aggregate of marks obtained in the written test and marks obtain in interview (i.e. out of 235 marks). He submitted that the Board tries to proceed on the basis of law and the directions / memorandum issued by the Government of India in various matter including matter pertaining to reservation. He submitted that the Board had reserved indents from various public sector banks for appointment to the posts of clerks, typists and stenographers for the year 1998-99 in their branches/offices in the State of Gujarat and Union Territories of Diu, Daman, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and the total number of vacancies were likely to be 547. He submitted that out of that the Board has declared 525 vacancies and out of that 262 for General Category, 37 for SC, 81 for ST, 145 for OBC, 5 for OH and 6 for ex-servicemen. According to him, the Board has acted as per law and the spirit and the Government memorandum in the matter of selection.
15. As against this, the petitioner has filed a rejoinder.
CONCLUSION :-
16. In view of the aforesaid submissions, I am of the view that the respondent-Board has failed to keep 14.5% reservation for ex-servicemen which is statutorily provided by way of provision of Constitution. In view of the same, the recommendation made by the respondent-Board by which the board is not able to keep 14.5% reservation is clearly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provision of Government of India’s guideline in this behalf. In my view, this petition deserves to be allowed and the order of recommendation made by the respondent-Board is required to be quashed and set aside.
17. In view of the same, the selection made by the respondent-Board, which has been stated in the affidavit is hereby quashed and set aside and the respondent-Board is directed to make a fresh selection in view of the guidelines issued by the Government of India i.e. to make reservation of 14.5% to ex-servicemen and further directed to fill up those posts from ex-servicemen in the interest of justice.
17.1. In the result, this petition is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.