Karnataka High Court
Shri Gurumurtappa Nagappa Kajagar vs Canara Bank on 16 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 13202 OF 2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI GURUMURTAPPA NAGAPPA KAJAGAR
S/O SHRI NAGAPPA KAJAGAR,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT TAMBAKI ONI,
NEAR HANUMAN TEMPLE,
TALIKOTE, VIJAYAPUR DISTRICT-586214
2. SMT JYOTI M C
W/O SHRI PUTTASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO.15, 3RD CROSS,
NAGARAVALE NAGAR,
NEAR SRES CONVENT,
SUNKADAKATTE, BENGALURU-560091
Digitally
signed by 3. SHRI PURUSHOTHAMA T H
ALBHAGYA
S/O SHRI T B HANUMEGOWDA,
Location:
HIGH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
COURT OF R/AT JODI THATTEKRE VILLAGE AND
KARNATAKA THATTEKERE POST,
KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN DISTRICT-573217
4. SHRI AJAY N
S/O S. NAGARAJA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT 2ND MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
NITTUVALLI EXTENSION,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
DAVANAGERE-577004
5. SHRI SHANMUKHARAJA H P
S/O SIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT 1ST CROSS, NEHRU NAGAR,
CHITRADURGA-577501
6. SHRI SUBRAMANYA B S
S/O SHIVANANTHA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT K G CIRCLE, BELLUR,
NAGAMANGALA, MANDYA-571418
7. SHRI RAVI MASABINAL
S/O SHANKAR MASABINAL,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT AMBEDKAR COLONY, BIJAPUR ROAD,
BASAVANA BAGEWADI-586283
8. SMT S BHAGYAMMA
W/O MANJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT BIDARAKERE,
HOLLKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577554
9. SHRI GIRISH H
S/O HEMANNA V,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.130, 3RD MAIN,
6TH CROSS, ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGARA,
LAGGERE, BENGALURU-560091
10. SHRI RAJEEV S
S/O SHIVA K,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
R/AT NO.63, BASTHIPURA BELAGOLA POST,
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571606
11. SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR M
S/O MUNEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT PALANAJOGIHALLI,
DODDABALLAPURA TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL-561203
12. SHRI MANJUNATH L
S/O LOKAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT DODDAGATTA POST,
HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA -577527
13. SHRI AMARESH
S/O PAMPAPATHI,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT NO.550/23, AMARAPPANA THOTA,
ANEKONDA ROAD,
DAVANAGERE-577001
14. SHRI P THIPPESWAMY
S/O LATE PAPANNA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT NEAR SHARADA SCHOOL,
JANATHA COLONY, CHALLAKERE,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577522
15. SMT HEMAVATHI
W/O RAMESH K,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT HODIGERE, CHANNAGIRI,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
16. SHRI GIRISH S
S/O CHIKKA RANGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT NO.26, 2ND CROSS,
ASHOK NAGAR, SUNKADAKATTE,
BENGALURU-560091
17. SMT HANNUMAKKA
W/O RANGANATH R P,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT KTZ NAGAR,
10TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
DAVANAGERE-577001
18. SMT E JYOTHI
W/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT SUNNAGARABEEDI,
SRINGERI MUTT ROAD,
KARUVINAKATTE CIRCLE,
CHITRADURGA-577501
19. SHRI NAVEEN V
S/O VIRUPAKASHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO.19, A K COLONY,
ANEKONDA, NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE,
DAVANAGERE-577001
20. SMT HEENA KOUSER
D/O MAMAHADALI,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT 1ST MAIN, 11TH CROSS,
JAI BHEEM NAGAR, HARIHARA-577601
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
21. SHRI PREETHAM P R
S/O RANGANATH,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
R/AT K T Z NAGAR,
10TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
DAVANAGERE-577002
22. SMT RADHA N
W/O RUDRESH H R ,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT TODARNAL, HOLEKERE,
CHITRADURGA-577557
23. SMT MANGALA GOWRAMMA T L
W/O LAKSHMINARAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT ELEPHANT ROAD, TYMAGONDLU,
NELAMANGALA,
BENGALURU RURAL-562132
24. SHRI ARUNKUMAR P
S/O PANDIAN A,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT NO.29/B, 2ND CROSS,
ANJANAPPA GARDEN,
DORAISWAMY NAGARA, MYSORE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560018
25. SHRI G PRASANNAKUMAR
S/O GURUSWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/AT AMBEDKAR COLONY,
CHIKKAJAJUR POST,
HOLEKERE, CHITRADURGA-577523
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
26. SHRI NAGESH M
S/O MADAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT HALEHALLI, MAYASANDRA POST,
ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-562107
27. SHRI SANTHOSH H R
S/O RAYAPPA H,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT SERVERKERI, HONNALI,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577217
...PETITIONERS
(BY MS.AVANI CHOKSHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CLIFTON D
ROZARIO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CANARA BANK
HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT NO.112,
J C ROAD, BENGALURU-560002
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
AND CEO
2. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK
HEAD OFFICE AT NO.112, J C ROAD,
BENGALURU-560002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE INTER
OFFICE MEMORANDUM DTD 09.03.2022 BEARING
REF.NO.BLC/HRM/E-12/2106/2022 AND EMAIL DTD
10.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT (PLACED AS
ANNEXURE-CR AND CS) AND OTHER SIMILAR
COMMUNICATIONS ISSUED IN OTHER CIRCLES OF THE
RESPONDENT BANK AND ETC.,
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
WP No. 13202 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned petition is filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing the Inter Office Memorandum dated
09.03.2022 bearing Ref. No BLC/HRM/E-12/2106/2022
and email dated 10.03.2022 issued by the Respondent
No.1 (placed as Annexure -CR and CS) and other
similar communications issued in other Circles of the
Respondent Bank.
2. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing outsourcing of jobs undertaken by the
Petitioners herein.
3. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
directing the Respondent Bank to treat the services of
the Petitioners as permanent employees of the
Respondent on scales of pay with effect from their
date of initial employment.
4. Pass any further orders as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit within the facts and circumstances of this
case in the interests of justice and equity."
2. The facts leading to the case are as under:
Petitioners claim that they are employed as daily
wage workers at various branches and offices of the
respondent-Bank and they have been regularly and
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
continuously employed for various periods extending upto
13 years. Petitioners have further pleaded that they are
paid their wages either by way of cash through voucher or
more recently by crediting to their bank accounts.
Petitioners claim that they are handling sweeping,
cleaning, counter work and other sub-staff peon cadre
duties. Petitioners have also placed reliance on the
memorandum of settlement entered into between the
management and the Union agreeing to regularize the
services of the persons engaged in PTE vacancies on a
daily wage basis in a phased manner over a period of
three years for workers engaged as on 30.4.2010.
Petitioners further claim that Canara Bank Employees
Union entered into a memorandum of settlement with the
respondent-Bank for regularization of only 421 daily
wagers and while holding deliberations between the
management and the union, it was resolved that posts will
be converted into house keeper cum peons. It was
resolved under the settlement that as a one time measure,
the persons engaged in permanent vacancies of the
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
Branch could participate in the filling up process of house
keeper cum peon vacancies, if they are found to be
engaged for a minimum period of 90 days as on
30.10.2015.
3. The captioned petition is filed feeling aggrieved
by the inter office memorandum dated 9.3.2022 and the
Email dated 10.3.2022. Under the impugned
memorandum, the respondents-Bank has issued directions
to all the respective branches not to engage unauthorized
persons. The Office Memorandum also indicates that
branch in-charges were strictly advised to refrain from
forwarding any representation for
regularization/absorption in future and they were lastly
called upon not to engage the services of outsider in place
of House Keeper-cum-Peon and other sub-staff works.
This inter office memorandum which is placed on record at
Annexure-CR and Email dated 10.03.2022 issued by
respondent No.1 at Annexure-DS are called in question by
the petitioners who claim to have been serving as House
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
Keepers cum Peons in the various branches of the
respondents-Bank.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners pending
consideration of the captioned petition have now come up
with an amendment application. By way of amendment,
the petitioners are now seeking the following reliefs:
"1. Direct the Respondent bank to continue the
services of the Petitioners in the same position until
conduct of regular recruitment.
2. Consider representations that will be given for
regularization of their service
3. Pass any further orders as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit within the facts and circumstances of this
case in the interests of justice and equity."
5. The respondent-Bank on receipt of notice has
tendered appearance and filed statement of objections.
The respondent-Bank while countering the grounds urged
in the writ petition placing reliance on the memorandum of
settlement, has taken a stand that no panel list of daily
wagers were maintained and the Bank has decided to go
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
for recruitment by notifying the vacancies with the
employment exchange duly adhering to the existing norms
for recruitment. To counter the claim of the petitioners
that they are serving respective branches of the
respondent-Bank against vacancies, a statement of
various branches is produced to indicate that Bank has
permanently employed house keeper cum peons against
vacancies and as of now, there are no vacancies. Reliance
is also placed on Annexure-R6.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned counsel appearing for respondent-Bank. I
have also given my anxious consideration to the
amendment application filed by the petitioners. The oral
objections tendered to the amendment application is also
taken note of. I have also given my anxious consideration
to the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in W.P.No.12877/2022 and confirmed by the
Division Bench in W.A.No.214/2023.
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
7. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.12877/2022 while examining the reliefs sought by
daily wagers who are identically placed as that of the
petitioners herein who claimed that they are working as
House Keepers cum peons at various branches has
declined to grant any relief and has proceeded to dismiss
the writ petition. Paragraphs 9 and 10 would be relevant,
which reads as under:
"9. The term "one-time measure" has to be
understood in its proper perspective. This would
normally mean that after the decision in Umadevi (3)
(2006) 4 SCC 1, each department or each
instrumentality should undertake a one-time exercise
and prepare a list of all casual, daily-wage or ad-hoc
employees who have been working for more than ten
years without the intervention of courts and tribunals
and subject them to a process verification as to
whether they are working against vacant posts and
possess the requisite qualification for the post and if
so, regularise their services.
10. At the end of six months from the date of
decision in Umadevi (3) [(2006) 4 SCC 1], cases of
several daily-wage/ad hoc/casual employees were still
pending before courts. Consequently, several
departments and instrumentalities did not commence
the one-time regularisation process. On the other
hand, some government departments or
instrumentalities undertook the one time exercise
excluding several employees from consideration either
on the ground that their cases were pending in courts
or due to sheer oversight. In such circumstances, the
employees who were entitled to be considered in
terms of para 53 of the decision in Umadevi (3)
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
[(2006) 4 SCC 1], will not lose their right to be
considered for regularisation, merely because the one-
time exercise was completed without considering their
cases, or because the six- month period mentioned in
para 53 of Umadevi (3) [(2006) 4 SCC 1) has expired.
The one-time exercise, should consider all daily-
wage/ad noc/casual employees who had put in 10
years of continuous service as on 10-4-2006 without
availing the protection of any interim orders of courts
or tribunals. If any employer had held the one-time
exercise in terms of para 53 of Umadevi (3) [(2006) 4
SCC 1], but did not consider the cases of some
employees who were entitled to the benefit of para 53
of Umadevi (3) [(2006) 4 SCC 1], the employer
concerned should consider their cases also, as a
continuation of the one-time exercise. The one-time
exercise will be concluded only when all the employees
who are entitled to be considered in terms of para 53
of Umadevi (3) [(2006) 4 SCC 1], are so considered."
8. The judgment rendered by the learned Single
Judge of this Court was questioned before the Division
Bench by identically placed daily wagers in
W.A.No.214/2023. The Division Bench while concurring
with the findings recorded by the Co-Ordinate Bench and
taking cognizance of the memorandum of settlement
dated 20.11.2015 held that respondent-Bank cannot be
expected either to absorb/regularize the intermittent
engagement of the appellants or treat them on par with
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
the permanent staff, contrary to the terms of
memorandum of settlement.
9. In view of the quietus given by the Co-ordinate
Bench which is confirmed by the Division Bench of this
Court, the petitioners have come up with an application
seeking amendment. Petitioners having consciously taken
cognizance of the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate
Bench which is confirmed by the Division Bench, now by
way of an amendment intend to seek a direction at the
hands of this Court to continue the services of the
petitioners in the same position till conduct of regular
recruitment.
10. The short question that needs consideration at
the hands of this Court is as to whether such a relief can
be entertained by this Court in the light of the judgment
rendered by the Co-Ordinate Bench which is confirmed by
the Division Bench.
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
11. The rebuttal material placed on record by
respondent-Bank more particularly Annexure-R6 gives an
indication that these petitioners who claim that they are
working as daily wagers at various branches against
vacancies stand effectively refuted. On taking cognizance
of Annexure-R6, this Court is more than satisfied that in
all the branches, the post of house keeping is filled up
through proper recruitment process and in terms of the
memorandum of settlement, the respondent-Bank is
bound to adhere to the recruitment norms. The material
on record also indicates that cleaning and dusting of the
respondent-Bank is undertaken by the permanent
employees of the Branches. The post at present is called
as House keeper/Peon. It is also not in dispute that the
petitioners were never appointed as casual laborers
against vacancies. What emerges from the material on
record, more particularly, the statement of objections is
that the respondent-Bank has appointed the permanent
employees to the post of cleaning and dusting of the
branch office. If these significant details are looked into,
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
then the question of considering the relief sought now in
the proposed amendment application cannot be
entertained at this juncture. If the post of house keeping
is filled up by permanent employees by following proper
recruitment process, till vacancies arise and recruitment
process is carried on by adhering to the norms and rules
relating to recruitment process, the petitioners who were
never appointed at any point of time cannot by way of
right claim to be continued as daily wagers with the
respondents-Bank. If there are no vacancies and the
cleaning tasks are already assigned to house keepers who
are appointed through a proper recruitment process, no
mandamus lies. The proposed amendment cannot be
entertained. This Court is hesitant to entertain
amendment application. Mandamus is typically issued
when there is failure to perform a legal duty. In a
situation where Respondent - Bank adhering to proper
procedure has filled vacancies and there are no additional
positions available, neither plea of regularization nor
mandamus by way of amendment to permit petitioners to
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
continue as daily wagers can be entertained. Courts
generally respect the autonomy to employees to manage
their workforce including decisions related to staffing
levels and job assignments. Therefore, I am of the view
that the proposed amendment now sought lacks
bonafides. Probably in anticipation to the judgment
rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in relation to the
identically placed daily wagers who have suffered an order
at the hands of this Court, which is confirmed by the
Division Bench, a feeble attempt is made by the
petitioners to seek lesser relief by way of proposed
amendment and a direction is sought at the hands of this
Court to call upon the respondents-Bank to not to
discontinue the services of the petitioners who claim that
they are working as daily wagers. Since this Court has
given a quietus to the issue involved in the case on hand
and as the petitioners are also asserting right on the same
set of facts, I am not inclined to grant any indulgence at
this juncture.
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC:2071
12. The writ petition is devoid of merits and
accordingly, stands dismissed.
I.A.No.1/2024 seeking additional reliefs by way of
amendment also stands rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ALB
