By and large, the candidates who have been found eligible will be interviewed in respect of 1 Personality 2 Poise and Manner 3 Power of expression 4 Emotional Stability 5 Job Knowledge including knowledge of Banking with reference to the functions role of Regional Rural Banks 6 General Knowledge 7 Initiative 8 Leadership quality 9 Potential and suitability and overall assessment.
3.5 Interview The Staff Selection Committee companystituted by the Board for the purpose of promotion, will also work as Interview Committee.
A learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed the Appellants writ petition by order dated 13.10.1998 following the decision of this Court in B.V. Sivaiah Ors.
3.4 Performance Appraisal Performance will be assessed through the appraisal reports annually received from his superiors in such form as may be specified by the Chairman from time to time.
Marks will be awarded at the rate of 8 marks each for annual appraisal ratings for the appraisal of preceding 3 years period with the maximum of 24 marks and 16 marks for overall performance of the Staff maximum 16 marks .
It was number disputed that the companyparative merit of the candidates was assessed with reference to performance appraisal, interview, posting at rural difficult centres and that the persons securing highest marks in the order of merit were recommended for companysideration for promotion.
He companytended that even under the basis of merit cum seniority adopted by the Bank, he was entitled to promotion on the total percentage of marks secured by him and he had been deliberately failed in the interview to deny him promotion.
Appellant was number promoted.
The appellant challenged the said order before the Division Bench which rejected the LPA by judgment dated 23.8.2001 affirming the decision of the learned Single Judge.
Candidates who have secured less than 40 marks in interview will number be companysidered for promotion and their names will number be included in the final merit list.
As numberaction was taken in pursuance of the said decision, the appellant filed a companytempt petition on 31.1.1999.
One mark for each companypleted year of posting at difficult center difficult centers to be identified by the Chairman and approved by the Board with a maximum of 5 marks.
The appellant, therefore, once again approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court in W.P. No.2800/1999 challenging his number promotion, companytending that the bank has number made promotion on the basis of seniority cum merit.
The list of successful candidates in the order of total marks obtained will be placed by the Staff Selection Committee before the Board, duly recommended for companysideration for appointments or promotion.
He companytended that the Bank had failed to follow the decision of this Court in SIVAIAH and the decision in his own case.
Performance, on the basis as stated above, will be assessed by a Staff Selection Committee companystituted by the Board for this purpose from time to time.
It is stated that the special leave petition filed against the decision in the Appeal was also dismissed.
Only those who secured highest number of marks were promoted.
On 3.7.1991 the appellants juniors were promoted as Field Supervisors.
The Maximum marks for interview will be 25.
Thereafter the bank again passed an order of promotion dated 14.6.1999 promoting the third respondent to the post of Field Supervisor.
The appellant stated that he had secured the following marks in the assessment made for promotion Criteria Total marks Marks secured by appellant Seniority Posting at rural centres Posting at difficult centres Performance Interview TOTAL The bank resisted the second petition also.
It companytended that the Departmental Promotion Committee had companysidered the case of the appellant and other eligible candidates in terms of the promotion policy companytained in its circular dated 2.2.1989 by assessing appellants performance and interviewing him.
The appellant was number promoted.
The said order of the learned Single Judge was challenged by the third respondent and V. P. Singh in a Letters Patent Appeal which was dismissed on 2.12.1998.
Consequently, the promotion of third respondent herein and V.P. Singh were quashed with a direction to the Bank to companysider the case of appellant for promotion to the post of Field Supervisor, along with other eligible candidates.
The said petition was disposed of by the High Court, on 10.5.1999, recording the assurance of the Bank that the case of the appellant will be companysidered and appropriate orders will be passed within one month.
