Officer as Usual File Writ in Chennai Court Against Injustice

Message from Chidambaram Annamalai  ( Collected from Facebook 13.06.12)

SUB: WRIT PETITION FILED BY AIUBOSA (AIBOA)

In continuation to our circular No.GS:151 dated 18.05.2012 on the subject, we wish to inform you that the writ petition came up for hearing today at the Madras High Court before the Hon’ble Judge. The Bank’s counsel also represented.

After hearing, the Learned Judge was pleased to adjourn the matter by one week on
the request of the Bank’s Counsel and directed the Bank to maintain status quo and
not to proceed with the selection process in the mean while.

The three serious anomalies are:
1. Applying APAR retrospectively and making 75% in each of the eligible years.
2. Not allowing RDO’s to participate in the General Channel.
3. Not giving Relaxation for Specialised Officers.

Comrades, by reading the order of the honourable Judge one can very easily understand the gravity of the situation and the legality on the matter. We do not want to explain further as the subject matter is in the court.

In the mean time we are given to understand that in some of the states, the leaders of the so called majority association are threatening the officers saying that they will give 50% marks in their APAR in the coming years and will damage their career also if they switch over to AIBOA. The democratic right of an individual cannot be snatched away by any such leaders.

We condemn such autocratic and brutal behaviour of such leaders and AIUBOSA will deal such situations very firmly.

We request all our Office Bearers / CC members of AIUBOSA and State Units to circulate this circular among all officers in your Region / State especially among RDOs, Specialized officers and aggrieved officers of APAR.

With revolutionary greetings,

Yours Comradely,

(D.S. GANESAN)
General Secretary

Appeal was sent to many important persons of the government from various corners of the country highlighting the reign of injustice going on in public sector banks in the matters of transfers and promotions. But none could get time to look into the fraudulent game going on , none of them tried to stop corrupt officers acting as per their whims and fancies spoiling the career of many officers .


Lastly one among thousands of aggrieved officers dares filing a case in court and decides to wait till he or she dies for justice.Normally court cases are decided in two or three decades and that too depends on whims of judges, advocates and big bosses.




Officers, especially top bankers who advocate merit and talk of fast track promotion to give chance to juniors are now building pressure on Ministry of Finance to reduce eligibility marks from 75% to 60%. 


It is bitter truth that merit of an officer cannot be judged by marks given to him by his assessor. Same officer gets 60 marks in Annual appraisal report from one boss and 95 from another boss; same officer gets 70 marks in one region and 98 marks IN OTHER REGION. 


Awarding of marks mostly depends on perception and conception of the assessing officer. If any biased, corrupt and selfish boss awards only 70 marks to a good officer, the career of the good officers is totally spoilt and there is no doubt that once beaten will always be beaten and consequently it is possible that the officer who worked under him becomes his boss.


If the assessing officer is prejudiced, or believer in WWW (wine, wealth and woman) he or she can spoil the future of any officer by giving very poor marks and there is no way to protest such unethical and evil acts.


In some states there is a tradition of awarding above 90 marks to all officers in annual appraisal report (AAR) whereas in some other state there is a practice of awarding in the range of 70 to 80. 


People will believe me or not God knows, but it is also a undeniable truth that at the time of promotion process Regional Head used to submit purely a false, concocted, fabricated, and fraudulent chart of marks to Central authorities as also to members of interview panels appointed for promotion process for officers who used to be candidate for promotion and this chart of marks were entirely different from the actual AAR. 


Such false game may be proved only by a through CBI investigation into the record of past two or three decades.


There is therefore no merit in denying opportunity to any officer based on marks. 


I can rather mention here that no officer should have got marks below 70 or 75, and if someone has been given marks from 60 to 70 , it means assessor does not have mind to properly assess the juniors or  the junior is not at all fit for bank job and he must have been recruited through illegal means, say by payment of bribe to recruiters. 


In such cases , performance assessing authority, reviewing authority and the officer who is being assessed and given marks below 70 must be removed from bank or given VRS. 


Normally a student obtaining 60 marks in education life used to be treated as intelligent. But in banks there is a practice of awarding 90 and above to almost all officers and hence the role of interview in final selection becomes more dominant and effective.


Similar is the position of officers who appear before Interview Panel , a part of promotion process. 


Union leaders and top ranked officers use to work in nexus with each other. They use to work  together as two partners of private firm to reject good officers and select bad officers in Promotion processes by resorting the tools of Interview .  It is interview where members of Interview panel could award Zero  to 25 marks or maximum marks without looking into any reality of staff appearing for promotion. 


If union leader or any VIP either from inside or from outside the bank recommended top bosses for promotion of any officer he could get 25 i.e. maximum marks marks in Interview and on the contrary any officer was to be rejected, the number given in Interview used to be below 5. 


No one can prove in court or can question the biased decision taken by interview members and can challenge the marks given in Interview by Interview panel.






Normally, easiest questions or  questions are not asked to an officer who is to be promoted and when officer has support of some prominent union leaders or some top bank officials. On the other hand if a meritorious officer (who is not flatterer) has to be rejected in promotion process, members of Interview panel will be unanimous in asking toughest and irrelevant questions. 


After all what is the record of Interview?




After all there is nothing to be judged about an officer in Interview appearing for promotion because he has already worked in the bank for five to 35 years. Ability and capability of an officer cannot be judged in 2 to 3 minutes of interview when the management could not judge him performance of several years.




In such position any unbiased person or lover of justice will be of  opinion that promotion of an officer from one scale to another scale should not be dependent on marks of APR or AAR and there should not by any group discussion or interview system.


After all, in interview, members of the panel pick officers as per his whims and fancies, there is no value of experience, no value of marks in appraisal and nothing is important as is important the recommendation of regional head or some key officers. In such position it is foolish to spend crores of rupees on conducting interview and paying Travelling bill to candidate appearing in promotion processes.


Let the top officers decide at their own level and select officers for promotion on the basis of seniority and if they feel that any officer is incompetent or is not interested to accept promotion on the ground of sickness, they should make a record of it. If officer continue to be non performer for say five years he may be forced to or offered retirement. Why after all bank will bear the burden of non performers.




It is arbitrary decision in promotion processes that officers have lost in the promotion processes and therefore many good officers have decided not to attend / participate in such processes. It is only bank which is suffering loss due to non participation of meritorious and talented guys. 


Most of good officers who values his dignity and respect much more than pay and allowances banks pay to them preferred voluntary retirement only because of Worst HRD policies and corrupt execution of these policies. 


There is no system of immediate justice to those who are willfully and with malicious intention rejected by interview panel. No appeal and no relief by courts even in two decades.


It is worthwhile to mention here that if a person joined as officer in seventies or eighties, he got first opportunity for promotion after 10 to 12 years and further for second promotion after 8 to 10 years . It means a good officer could become scale III in a span of 20 to 25 years. Now management directly appoints officer in scale III and makes him in scale IV in 3 to 5 years neglecting the old batch who devoted served the bank for two to three decades. 


Similar situation occurs when officers are directly recruited in scale II or III or IV and V and so on. I have seen many examples of officers who has experience of two to three decades are rejected but the person whose age is not even equal to or less than the service age of former is selected by Interview panel.


In seventies and eighties officers joining in banks used to be treated as equal or super to IAS and IPS officers and now after three decades officers joining in banks is treated as worse than a clerk or a peon in central government. 


Role of WWW has become more dominant than the knowledge and skill to work. I would rather say that future of banks under public sector has been spoilt by dirty officers whose intention is malicious and who served the bank only for his personal interest. 


Another startling truth is that a person joining in banks as officer do not continue in the job more than 5 years. Attrition rate in banks is more than any other sector.


Sickness in banks is growing, volume of NPA is increasing and attrition rate in banks is increasing year after due to


a.        Misuse of power in lending, contractual work, recruitment, promotion, transfer etc.


b.        Abuse of best HRD policies to serve self interest


c.        Ineffective judiciary due to which injustice is allowed to perpetuate


d.      Senior intelligent and hard workers are constrained to work under junior, less talented and non-serious workers only because flattery and bribery played key role at all level in all activities.


Bank management should stop making lame excuses that seniors are not available or senior are not interested for promotion or junior are more talented. It is the vested interest of top few officials that they pick officers in higher scale from market and deprive the promotion chances of decades old officers available in their bank. 


It is ridiculous to listen that adequate number of good officers are not available in any bank or in any industry for promotion. It is totally mismanagement that such a situation has arisen even if it is assumed that such situation exists. 


Bitter truth is that all policies are framed in good way but executed in bad way. 


It is only the whims of members of interview panel which matters much because by giving 25 out of 25 these members can pull an inefficient person from bottom to top. If an officer has to be rejected , interview panel will give only 2 or 3 marks in interview which will nullify the effect of higher marks he or she got in annual appraisals.


It is absolutely unconstitutional to recruit directly from market an officer in higher scale when adequate numbers of experienced officers are present in the bank and who are waiting for promotion for decades as per old policies. 


Every year management of banks change the policy to suit their mind and to deny someone and award some other. 


Banks can prosper in the hands of well experienced officers and not young MBA or highly qualified officers who do not have adequate exposure in bank. An experienced officer is always better in banking industry than a fresher MBA.


Volume of NPA is increasing in banks because young team of officers sitting at top and higher  posts whereas  senior and talented team of officers are subordinate to them . Offices who are boss know less than those who are working under them because of flattery culture in promotion process as also in transfer decisions. 


Where no alternative ways is visible to ensure absolute justice it is better desirable to have totally seniority based promotion which will at least minimize misuse or abuse of HRD policies by whimsical top officials.


If  banks adopt once again the old method of screening of officers  at CO level and promote an officer based on seniority until there is serious charge against the senior officer, there will be at least no promotion based on caste, community, region , religion or on whims and fancies of members of promotion committees or Interview panel.