Anshu Kumari v. The Punjab National Bank

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1591 of 2023 ====================================================== Anshu Kumari, D/o- Sri Manan Singh, resident of Village- Dharmbari, Safiabad, P.O.- Safiabad, P.S.- Baikunthpur, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj, Bihar- 841416.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Punjab National Bank (A Govt of India Enterprises), Human Resource Development Department, through the Managing Director Cum CEO, Plot No.- 4, Sector- 10, Dwarka, New Delhi, 11075. 2.

The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank (A Govt of India Enterprises), Human Resource Development Department, Zonal Office, 2nd Floor Chanakya Towers, R Block, Patna- 800001.

3.

The Chief Manager, Regional Office, Punjab National Bank (A Govt of India Enterprises), Human Resource Development Department, Ujjawal Complex, Chandmari, Motihari, District- East Champaran, 845401. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jayant Kumar Karn, Advocate Mr.Jay Karn, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 22-06-2023 The petitioner is an applicant for appointment of peon in the respondent-Bank.

The prescription regarding educational qualification, as per advertisement (Annexure-P/1) prescribes an upper limit and reads as follows:

"12 ववीं ककक्षा यक्षा समकक उतत्तीर्ण कककतु कनिकर्णष्ट कतकथि 01.01.2022 कको स्निक्षातक निहवीं चक्षाकहए सक्षाथि हत्ती अकग्रेजत्ती पढनिग्रे / कलिखनिग्रे कक्षा बतुकनियक्षारत्ती जक्षानि ।" Translated in English reads as follows:

"Passed 12th class or equivalent but not

Patna High Court CWJC No.1591 of 2023(2) dt.22-06-2023 2/2 Graduate as on specified date 01.01.2022 as well as basic knowledge of reading/writing English is required." The admitted position that emerges from pleadings is that the petitioner was a Graduate. She was thus possessing education qualification higher than the upper limit as per advertisement. The petitioner's disqualification in terms of the advertisement under which she made an application, and which have not been challenged, is thus manifest from the pleadings in the writ petition.

No case is made out to invoke the discretionary writ jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner as no right of the petitioner is made out based on pleadings to claim appointment in terms of the advertisement dated 05.03.2022. Writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SUMIT/- U