This refers to Mumbai
High court judgement pronounced Today in a case related to Central Bank of
India . The Bombay high court on Tuesday held that its ( bank’s ) recruitment
policy, which allows campus recruitment/interview method for appointment of
officers against permanent vacancies on regular basis, was illegal and
unconstitutional.
Bank management of almost
all public sector banks has resorted to campus hiring, not only in scale I but
in scale II and scale III too. During last ten years top ranked officers of
almost all banks have functioned in an arbitrary manner, recruited persons of
their choice, giving favours to kith and kins of high profile persons and
denying the talented unemployed youth. Recruitment of persons for some personal
gain or to give favour to sons and daughters of known dignitaries has damaged
work culture in banks and adversely affected the asset quality of almost all
banks.
Top management in public
sector banks picked up persons from campus of their choice and in the name of
merit they raped those who have been working in the bank for years and decades.
Not only in recruitment have they harmed the future of those existing employees
who were waiting for promotion to higher cadre and higher scale. There are
instances where bank management recruited officer directly in scale III whereas
hundreds and thousands of officers eligible for promotion to scale III are
denied their rights.
Further due to their
arbitrary and unjustified recruitment of officers from campus in scale III or
scale II management of bank had to pay double salary or more for the same work
which could be and which hitherto has been performed by junior officers and
clerks.
Is there anyone who can punish
such top ranked officers whose faulty action caused huge loss to the bank??
Why these responsible and
top ranked officers should not be personally punished and taken to task so that
in near future no one dares violating the rights of existing employees and
denying the opportunity to really talented youths.
I am unable to understand
why the courts have simply warned the bank to desist from campus hiring in
future and why not court thought it necessary to impose penalty of erring top
officials.
In response to court verdict
against Central bank and its clear warning to bank not to repeat such campus
hiring, Government of India should order CBI inquiry into all recruitment which
took place during last ten years in public sector banks through campus hiring
and whether those officers are really better than already working officers in
banks and whether there was any corrupt dealing in such type of recruitment.
Central Bank’s campus hiring illegal: HC
Times of India
MUMBAI: In a major setback for Central Bank of India, the Bombay high court on Tuesday held that its recruitment policy, which allows campus recruitment/interview method for appointment of officers against permanent vacancies on regular basis, was illegal and unconstitutional.
The HC directed the bank to refrain from making any appointments against permanent vacancies on regular basis via campus recruitment\interview mechanism, warning that if it did so, it would be non-est (not binding) in law.
A division bench comprising Justices A M Khanvilkar and Mridula Bhatkar directed the bank to refrain from making any appointment against permanent vacancies on regular basis via campus recruitment\interview mechanism, warning that if it did so, it would be non-est (not binding) in law. "We hold that in the matter of public employment, as per constitutional scheme, the mandate is to invite applications from all eligible persons by giving wide publicity, without exception. The fact that other state instrumentalities have resorted to campus interview mode of appointment in the past can be no basis to legitimize that process which inevitably tramples the fundamental rights of otherwise qualified and eligible citizens to be considered for the public posts along with similarly placed persons,'' the court said.
Further, it pointed out that the argument of liberalization, autonomy or competition with private sector, tapping of candidates from specialized field or better qualified candidates through campus recruitment could be no basis to uphold the impugned action of the bank. "The successive pronouncements of the apex court have affirmed that in matter of public employment, it should be done only by inviting applications from the public at large by giving wide publicity and issuing public advertisements,'' the HC said, refusing to buy the argument that candidates selected through campus interview were a class apart and utilizing their expertise could help compete and match the performances of private and foreign banks.
A section of PG management students had filed a writ petition challenging the recruitment policy of Central Bank, saying it was against constitutional provisions and should be quashed. They wanted the court to direct the bank to issue an advertisement to ensure a transparent recruitment process.
The bank submitted that recruitment through campus interview was a well-known method and was permitted as per its recruitment and promotion policy. It further contended that the method helps identify and select the best talent.
The petitioners brought to the notice of the court that most of the colleges from where students were recruited were private institutions, giving credence to the theory of the possibility of pick-and-choose approach adopted in the empanelment of the stated colleges\institutions.
The HC directed the bank to refrain from making any appointments against permanent vacancies on regular basis via campus recruitment\interview mechanism, warning that if it did so, it would be non-est (not binding) in law.
A division bench comprising Justices A M Khanvilkar and Mridula Bhatkar directed the bank to refrain from making any appointment against permanent vacancies on regular basis via campus recruitment\interview mechanism, warning that if it did so, it would be non-est (not binding) in law. "We hold that in the matter of public employment, as per constitutional scheme, the mandate is to invite applications from all eligible persons by giving wide publicity, without exception. The fact that other state instrumentalities have resorted to campus interview mode of appointment in the past can be no basis to legitimize that process which inevitably tramples the fundamental rights of otherwise qualified and eligible citizens to be considered for the public posts along with similarly placed persons,'' the court said.
Further, it pointed out that the argument of liberalization, autonomy or competition with private sector, tapping of candidates from specialized field or better qualified candidates through campus recruitment could be no basis to uphold the impugned action of the bank. "The successive pronouncements of the apex court have affirmed that in matter of public employment, it should be done only by inviting applications from the public at large by giving wide publicity and issuing public advertisements,'' the HC said, refusing to buy the argument that candidates selected through campus interview were a class apart and utilizing their expertise could help compete and match the performances of private and foreign banks.
A section of PG management students had filed a writ petition challenging the recruitment policy of Central Bank, saying it was against constitutional provisions and should be quashed. They wanted the court to direct the bank to issue an advertisement to ensure a transparent recruitment process.
The bank submitted that recruitment through campus interview was a well-known method and was permitted as per its recruitment and promotion policy. It further contended that the method helps identify and select the best talent.
The petitioners brought to the notice of the court that most of the colleges from where students were recruited were private institutions, giving credence to the theory of the possibility of pick-and-choose approach adopted in the empanelment of the stated colleges\institutions.
Some of viewers are afraid that if court restricts employment through campus hiring , the fate of unemployed youth will be jeopardised. Here I would like to make it clear that court has simply instructed bank to follow necessary guidelines and carry out entire recruitment process in a more transparent manner. If bank is allowed to resort to campus hiring, the top bankers will choose only those campuses where their sons and daughters are admitted or those campuses where some monetary gain is expected . It is seen in the past that banks recruited scale II and scale III officers as Credit processing officer and offered them the pay which existing employees get after serving bank for two three decades.. This has resulted in severe disparities in total emoluments payable to old employees . It is true that a few of these directly recruited officers have performed well , but it is also true that many of junior bust existing employees are processing credit proposals in a better way than those who were recruited in scale II and scale III.There are cases when even clerks are good processing persons. It is unfortunate that many banks are still in process of recruiting officers in scale II or scale III at the cost of promotion prospects of existing junior level officers.
ReplyDeleteDear sir,
ReplyDeleteCan u please tell clearly whether court has banned the banks form campus recruits??because i myself went through the judgement ,but nothing of that sort is mentioned there..Kindly clarify...
Thanks and regards,
Prakhar Gupta
An officer who has worked for two or three decades successfully in a bank without facing any charges of irregularities or lapses is not found fit by Interview board for promotion of officer from one scale to other but the same team of interview panel pick up entirely fresh candidate or an officer of other banks of two or three year experience is found fit when they go to a campus for selection or call candidate from other bank or FI for the post in scale II or scale III.
ReplyDeleteIBPS also work in nexus with bank officials in picking up officers in sclae II and scale iii in the name of specialist officer and pay them two or three times of normal salary payable to a fresher or a probationary officer .
Is there any one to investigate such scam which causes not only loss of money but also gives frustration to hundreds and thousands of officers who are waiting for promotion for years together.
The most astonishing is that an officers with two to three decades is not promoted to scale III or scale IV or Scale V but an outsider is directly recruited in sclae III and promoted to sclae IV and V within a span of four to five years .
How far is it justified ?
Will it not spoil the work culture?
Who are responsible and punishable for such improper way of recruitment?
Or the reign of injustice will continue as it has been going on for last three four decades?
Officers who are aggrieved with bank management file case in local civil court or file writ in High Court or Supreme Court but the case is not decided even in two or three decades due to ill motivated actions of advocates representing banks .And bank in general continue to pick up officers as per their whims and fancies for higher scale and for higher post.
Top ranked bankers who are still advocating campus hiring and who are advocating appeal in Supreme Court against high court order are real enemy of bank and they must be taken to task by government of India and RBI. It is these ill motivated greedy officers who have caused rise in bad assets through their complete negligence and lack of monitoring because they are always busy in earning bribe and cost gifts. http://jaindanendra.blogspot.in/2013/05/why-banks-want-appeal-in-supreme-court.html
ReplyDelete