## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT:**
## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE**
**FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935**
## **WP(C).No. 21153 of 2013 (T)**
**----------------------------**
**PETITIONER(S): ------------------------**
**STATE BANK OF INDIA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, SOUTHERN TRADE TOWER, PUSHPA JUNCTION, FRANCIS ROAD, KOZHIKODE-2, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER (HR).**
**BY ADVS. SRI.P.GOPAL, SRI.B.MURALEEDHARAN,**
## **RESPONDENT(S):**
**----------------------------**
**1. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), OFFICE OF REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030.**
## **2. ALL KERALA EX-SERVICEMEN SECURITY**
**STAFF ASSOCIATION OF BSNL, C/O.ARJUN AGENCY, R.NO.G-40, KOOSER COMPLEX, CALTEX JUNCTION, NEAR N.S.TALKIES, KANNUR-2, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.**
**R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, A.S.G. OF INDIA. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA.**
**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-09-2013, ALONG WITH WP(C). NO. 21737 OF 2013 AND WP(C).NO.22055 OF 2013, THE COURT ON 20-12-2013 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**rs.**
## **WP(C).No. 21153 of 2013 (T)**
## **APPENDIX**
## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-**
- **P1: COPY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE GUIDELINES FRAMED BY THE BANK.**
- **P2: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.29(90-91) DATED 08.11.1990.**
- **P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 11.10.2012 IN WP(C).NO. 26105 OF 2011 AND IN CONNECTED CASES.**
- **P4: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE BANK DATED 31.12.2012.**
- **P5: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CORPORATE CENTRE OF THE BANK DATED 16.12.2010.**
- **P6: COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY OF THE LOCAL HEAD OFFICE OF THE BANK DATED 04.04.2012.**
- **P7: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE ALL KERALA EX-SERVICE SECURITY STAFF ASSOCIATION OF BSNL DATED 06.05.2013.**
- **P8: COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE BANK BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.**
- **P9: COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED 23.07.2013.**
- **P10: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) DATED 22.08.2013 AS ENDORSED IN HIS PROCEEDINGS SHEET.**
- **P11: COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE BANK DATED 23.08.2013 AS REQUESTED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL).**
## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-**
**EXT.R2A COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, DEPARTMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE DATED 31/12/2012.**
- **EXT.R2B COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/02/2013.**
## **//TRUE COPY//**
## **P.A. TO JUDGE**
**rs.**
## **A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J**
## *** * * * * * * * * * * * ***
W.P.C.Nos.21153, 21737 of 2013 and 22055 of 2013
---------------------------------------Dated this the 20[th] day of December 2013
## **J U D G M E N T**
Common issues are involved in the above writ petitions and hence they are decided together.
2. W.P.C.No.21153 of 2013 is filed by State Bank of India as petitioner seeking to quash Ext.P10 order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) dated 22/08/2013 on the file of I.D.No.7(14) 2013/D2 and further for a direction to restrain the first respondent from giving effect to the said order.
3. The facts as disclosed would indicate that the Government of India and the Corporate Centre of the bank have laid down certain guidelines by way of Ext.P1 for recruitment of armed guards in the bank on permanent basis. Their qualification and the method of recruitment is also specified. The maximum age limit for armed guards is
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
2
fixed as 45 years. In the selection conducted by the bank in the year 2010 it has rejected the bio-data of temporary substituted watchman who had crossed 45 years as on the cut off date fixed by the bank. Such persons approached this Court by filing writ petition and by a common judgment dated 11/10/2012 in W.P.C.No.26105 of 2011 and connected cases, this Court, while upholding the decision of the bank rejected the claim of the petitioners. Ext.P3 is the said judgment. Thereafter, in terms of Ext.P3 judgment which permitted the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for modifying the guidelines, the temporary substituted watchman submitted representation which was rejected as per Ext.P4 dated 31/12/2012.
4. In the meantime, Ext.P1 guidelines was modified to the extent of changing the mode of selection from district wise to circle wise and providing a selection committee for interviewing the candidate in terms of the guidelines issued by the Government of India. Ext.P5 is the
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
3
said circular. However, there is no change to the upper age limit as stipulated by Ext.P1 guidelines.
5. The bank identified 170 vacancies of armed guards in various branches within Kerala circle in the year 2011 and selection was conducted in terms of Exts.P1, P5 and P6. The 2[nd] respondent herein submitted Ext.P7 letter dated 06/05/2013 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) (for short ‘ALC’) inter alia contending that the bank is not following any permanent rules in appointing the armed guards and a direction was sought for calling upon the banks to regularise the temporary substituted watchman on permanent basis. On receipt of notice, the bank had filed necessary reply in terms of Ext.P8. However, when the date and venue for conducting physical test for candidate was fixed, the bank was served Ext.P10 order dated 22/08/2013 directing the bank not to proceed with the recruitment of armed guards from 23/08/2013. It is contended by the petitioner that the impugned order at Ext.P10 is illegal and
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
4
vitiated by error apparent on the face of the record. As far as the maximum upper age limit is concerned, it has been fixed by the guidelines issued by the Government of India as 45 years and there is no change in the said situation. The bank has taken a decision to permit candidates who had earlier participated in the selection process and was not considered for the appointment, if eligible otherwise, to be considered for the current recruitment process. But the only criteria is that they have to qualify for the physical test as well as the interview and they have to comply with other requirements as well. It is inter alia contended that the ALC has no authority to issue interim orders but can only mediate and promote settlement in terms of Section 12 of the ID Act. Hence it is contended that Ext.P10 is contrary to the rules prevailing in the bank for recruitment of guards.
6. Counter affidavit is filed by the 2[nd] respondent inter alia stating that in view of the specific directions in Ext.P3 judgment, the petitioners are entitled to seek
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
5
regularisation and also relaxation of upper age limit for future selection and without properly considering their requests, Ext.P4 is issued. Respondent had issued Ext.P7 representation before the ALC wherein specific mention has been made regarding violation of guidelines with reference to age limit. It is therefore contended that if appointment is made in terms of the present notification, the same will affect the interest of the members of the 2[nd] respondent.
7. W.P.C.No.21737 of 2013 is filed by an Ex-service man inter alia seeking for a direction to the 1[st] respondent to finalise Ext.P4 and the proceedings evidenced by Ext.P5 within a time frame. They also sought for a direction to respondents 2 to 4 namely State Bank of India and its officers not to proceed with the selection process for recruitment which is interdicted by Ext.P5 order of the 1[st] respondent. The first respondent is the ALC and Ext.P5 is the same as Ext.P10 in W.P.C.No.21153 of 2013. Ext.P4 dated 04/02/2013 is the representation submitted by the
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
6
petitioner association to the ALC. During the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner also produced Ext.P8, another representation submitted by the 2[nd] respondent in W.P.C.No.21153 of 2013 seeking for relaxation of upper age limit and to give permanent appointment to such persons employed on temporary basis.
8. W.P.C.No.22055 of 2013 is filed by another Exservice man for a direction to the first respondent ALC to finalise Ext.P2 within a time frame. Ext.P2 is the representation submitted by the petitioner before the ALC to issue necessary directions to the respondent to give permanent appointment to ex-service man.
9. Having regard to the nature of contentions urged in the above writ petitions, the short question to be considered is whether the persons employed as temporary guards could be made permanent and whether the ALC (Central) can issue directions to stop the selection process initiated by the State Bank of India.
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
7
10. It is not in dispute that the process of selection of armed guards in State Bank of India is controlled by guidelines framed by the bank on the basis of guidelines issued by the Government of India. Under such circumstances, unless it is pointed out that the bank has taken any steps to violate the guidelines, it is not open for ALC or any other authority as the case may be to prevent the bank from proceeding with the recruitment process.
11. As far as the claim of the armed guards appointed on temporary basis is concerned, such persons who are qualified as per the guidelines issued by the bank are definitely entitled to participate in the selection process. However, the claim for permanent appointment cannot be granted in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in **State of Karnataka v. Umadevi** _[(2006) 4 SCC 1]_ which is reiterated in **State of Kerala v. G.V.Chandrashekar** _[(2009) 4 SCC 342]_ . In the writ petitions filed by the exservice men the main relief sought for is to direct the ALC
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
8
(Central) to pass appropriate orders in the matter and to intervene in the selection process. As already stated, ALC (Central) cannot intervene in the recruitment process of the bank. It can only consider whether the applicants before it has a valid dispute, which is required to be adjudicated by the appropriate authority. It is not open for ALC to issue interim directions to stop the recruitment process which is taken up to fill up the vacancies in the bank..
12. The ex-serviceman also has a case that they were given an opportunity to give representations before the Government. From Ext.P4 in W.P.C.No.21153 of 2013, it is evident that the bank cannot give any relaxation with reference to the upper age limit. Any such modification could be made only by Government of India. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioners in W.P.C.Nos.21737 of 2013 and 22055 of 2013 or the Unions or their Associations have to approach the Central Government to seek relaxation of upper age limit.
W.P.C.No.21153 & conn.cases
9
Under such circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of as under;
i) W.P.C.No.21153 of 2013 is allowed and Ext.P10 is quashed.
ii) W.P.C.Nos.21737 of 2013 and 22055 of 2013 are disposed of without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to approach the Central Government for modification of the upper age limit as specified in the guidelines of the bank.
iii) It shall be open for the ALC (Central) to dispose of the representation received by the petitioners in accordance with law.
(sd/-)
**(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)**
jsr
