S.P. BISWAS AND OTHERS ETC. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS.

Citation: [1991] 3 S.C.R. 769 · Decided: 27-08-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L.M. SHARMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

S.P. BISWAS AND OTHERS ETC. 
v. 
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 
AUGUST 27, 1991 
[L.M. SHARMA AND J.S. VERMA, JJ.] 
Civil Service-Promotion to Middle Management Grade II of th<' 
State Bank of India-'-'Promotion Policy dated 31. 10. 1983 read with 
Circular dated 13:9. 1989-Procedure mentioned-Whether arbitrary. 
Bank-Service-Promotion to Middle Management Grade II oj 
State Bank of lndia:--Promotion policy-Whether discriminatory. 
The appellants being aggrieved by the promotion policy of the 
respondent-Bank dated 31.10.1983 read with the Circular dated 
13.9.1989 for promotion from the cadre of Junior Management Grade-I 
A 
B· 
c 
to Middle Management Grade-II, moved the High Courts under Article 
D 
226 of the Constitution: 
The policy provides for two channels for promotion, namely, the 
Merit Channel and the Seniority Channel. For filling vacancies by 
promotion from the cadre of Junior Management Grade-I to that of 
Middle Management Grade-II, 65% of the total vacancies were reserved 
E 
for the Seniority Channel and the remaining 35% for the Merit 
Channel. 
The criterion mentioned in the policy for the Merit Channel pro-
vides 40 per cent marks for written test, JO per cent marks for seniority, 
20 per cent marks for performance appraisal, 20 per cent m~rks for 
F 
interview and the remaining 10 per cent marks for passing the examina-
tion held by the Bankers' Institute. 
The High Courts dismissed the writ applications, against which 
the appeals were filed in this Court. 
The appellants contended that the marks under all other heads 
amounting to a maximum of 80 per cent instead of the maximum of 40 
per cent presc;-ibed for the written test should be the proper criterion to 
G 
call a candidate for inter. i~w in order to make a proper selection on the 
basis of merit; that by taking into account the marks of written test 
alofe there is exclusion of other meritorious candidates whose aggregate 
H 
769 
770 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
I 1991] 3 S.C.R. 
A including the marks obtained under the other heads may exceed the 
corresponding aggregate of marks of candidates obtaining higher 
marks in written test alone. On this basis the policy for tilling vacancies 
from the Mer~_,.Channel by promotion was alleged to be arbitrary. 
t-
B 
c 
• 
The respondent-Bank, contended that the provision for the Merit 
Channel for promotion was made in the policy to give accelerated pro-
motion to the academically brilliant persons with the object of provid-
ing incentive to them and thereby improving the quality of personnel in 
the higher cadre; that the policy of deciding merit on the basis of writ-
ten test alone has been consistently followed and the Circular dated 
13.9.1989 was merely a clarification of the manner of preparation of the 
Select List to make the selection more objective and to yield better 
results by getting the most meritorious candidates from all circles. 
Dismissing the appeals, this Court, 
HELD: 1. Keeping in view the laudable object of attracting 
D academically brilliant candidates into the Bank's service as officers by 
direct recruitment by giving incentive of accelerated promotion to the 
most meritorious amongst them who. maintain a high standard of 
achievement is conducive to public interest and cannot be faulted. [773C I 
'f 
2. Of the several heads under which the marks are divided for 
E 
promotion to Merit Channel, written test and interview are the only 
ones which depend on the current performance. The marks under the 
remaining three heads of seniority, performance appraisal and 
C.A.1.1.B. (passing of examination held by Bank's Institute) relate to 
past performance of the candidate which are matters of record. It is, 
_,-( ~ · 
therefore, the appraisal of the current performance by written test and 
F 
interview which alom' is the real part for a proper appraisal of the 
current performance of the candidate for the purpose of assessing his 
merit for promotion through the Merit Channel. In this situation, if the 
marks obtained in the written test alone are taken into account for 
preparing the Select List to call candidates for an interview depending 
upon the number of vacancies available in Merit Channel the criterion 
G 
adopted cannot be termed arbitrary. [773C-F] 
3. The marks obtained for seniority, performance appraisal and 
C.A.1.1.B. are based on service record and not on appraisal of the 
candidate by a mode independent of service record for assessing the true 
current wort

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.