Ram Prakash v. Punab National Bank & ANR

$~3 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 8805/2016 & CM Nos. 36016-17/2016 RAM PRAKASH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vishwendra Verma and Mr. Ganesh Kumar, Advocates.

Versus

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Rajat Arora, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R

% 30.09.2016 It is the petitioner's case that despite being duly qualified for the appointment to the post of Probationary Officer in the respondent/Punjab National Bank, he has neither been issued an employment letter nor has he been allowed to join the said Bank. He refers to Annexure P-4 of the writ petition dated 01.04.2016, which inter alia conveys to the petitioner as under:- "

We are glad to inform you that based on your performance in the CWE Main Examination and interview, the order of preferences registered by you, vacancies furnished by Participating Organisations for 2016-17, spirit of Govt, guidelines, administrative exigency etc. you have been provisionally allotted against vacancies in OBC category in PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK."

It is the petitioner's contention that despite the subsequent communications with the respondents for issuance of an employment letter, there has been no response from the respondents. The learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on receipt of an advance copy of the petition, states upon instructions that a proper reply shall be given to the petitioner within two weeks from today. In the circumstances, this writ petition be treated as the petitioner's representation to the respondents, which shall be disposed off by a speaking order by 24.10.2016 and the decision taken be duly communicated to the petitioner. If the petitioner is otherwise qualified for the post, it is expected that one vacancy shall be kept alive for him by the respondents. The writ petition alongwith pending applications stands disposed off in the above terms.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J.

SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 sb