HYC threatens to stage protest if SBI fails to clarify over alleged violation against job reservation for STs from Meghalaya 

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaAugust 14, 2024

The Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC) on Wednesday threatened to stage a protest if the State Bank of India (SBI) fails to clarify within five days on the alleged appointment of candidates belonging to ST communities of other states against the reservation meant for STs from Meghalaya.

The SBI, Central Recruitment & Promotion Department, Corporate Centre, Mumbai has invited applications for appointment to the post of Junior Associate (Customer Support & Sales) in Clerical cadre in State Bank of India.

According to the said Advertisement, 77 numbers of vacancies are to be filed up in the State of Meghalaya of which 33 posts are reserved for STs, 3 posts for OBCs, 7 Posts for EWS and 34 posts for General category. The quantum of reservation for STs is as per the instructions.

Moreover, the said posts do not have provisions for Inter-Circle Transfer/Inter-State Transfer and is a Group-C Post of service.

“With regard to the appointment of the above vacancies and specifically under the reserved quota of 44% for STs of the State of Meghalaya, it has been brought to our notice that Candidates belonging to the ST Communities of other States have been selected for appointment for the above stated post against the reservation meant for STs of the State of Meghalaya,” HYC president Roy Kupar Synrem said in a letter to the Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Shillong Administrative Office, Dhankheti, Shillong.

“This decision of SBI to allot the posts reserved for the STs of the State of Meghalaya to STs from another State is a clear case of depriving the STs of Meghalaya of the benefit of such reservation and is against various Judgment and orders of the Supreme Court of India in addition to be violating of the instructions given by the concern Ministry of the Government of India,” he said.

“Therefore, we demand that SBI should provide clarification to us as on what basis such an appointment is made which against the prevailing instructions and violating the Supreme Court’s Judgment and orders, within 5 working days from today and failing which we will be left with no option but to organise protest programs against the SBI in Khasi-Jaintia Hills Districts of the State,” Synrem added.

The HYC has further stated in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao {(1994)3 SCC 130} case, the Supreme Court while rejecting the contention that a member of Scheduled/ Castes/Scheduled Tribes should get the benefit of the status ‘for the purpose of the Constitution throughout the territory of India’, it was observed that if such a contention is to be accepted the expression “In relation of that State” would become nugatory.

The same view was taken by the Court in the case of Action Committee Vs Union of India and another {(1994) 5 SCC 244} and in the case of Subhash Chandra and another Vs Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and others {(2009) 15 SCC 458}.

The 5 Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Bir Singh vs Delhi Jal Board & Ors (Civil appeal No. 1085 of 2013) while pronouncing its judgment on 30th August, 2018 has categorically held that “a person who is recognised as a member of Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes in his original State, will be entitled to all benefits of reservation under the Constitution in that State only and not in other States/Union Territories and not entitled to the benefits of reservation in the migrated State/Union Territory”.