RUDRA KUMAR PAL . vs POORVANCHAL GRAMIN BANK CHAIRMAN — C.A. No. 8934/2011
Case under Section III-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010194862010
Filing Date
01-Jul-2010
Registration No
C.A. No. 8934/2011
Diary Number
19486/2010
Order Date
22-Feb-2023
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RUDRA KUMAR PAL .
Adv. MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-7] MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-6] MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-5] MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-4] MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-3] MANOJ K. MISHRA[P-2] MANOJ K. MISHRA
Respondent(s)
-
1.POORVANCHAL GRAMIN BANK CHAIRMAN
Adv. PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-12] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-13] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-14] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-15] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-16] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-17] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY MITTER & MITTER CO.[R-1] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-11] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-10] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-9] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-8] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-7] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-6] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-4] PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY[R-3] MITTER & MITTER CO. MITTER & MITTER CO.[R-2]
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
22-Feb-2023
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Feb-2023
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal
-
21-Oct-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Jul-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Oct-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Sep-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Aug-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
27-Jul-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Jul-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Apr-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Mar-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Oct-2010
ROPView PDF
-
09-Aug-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Jul-2010
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 8934/2011
Case Summary: Rudra Kumar Pal v. Poorvanchal Gramin Bank (C.A. 8934/2011) The Supreme Court dismissed appellants' challenge to a promotion selection list for Officers Scale-I at Poorvanchal Gramin Bank dated September 10, 2009. The Court upheld the High Court's dismissal, finding the selection process complied with Regional Banks (Appointment and Promotion) Rules 1998, which mandated seniority-cum-merit based selection using written tests (70 marks), interviews (20 marks), and performance appraisals (10 marks). The appellants failed to demonstrate they scored higher overall marks than selected candidates. The appeals were dismissed with no costs on February 22, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts