IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10508 of 2008(A)
1. BSNL SECURITY STAFF ASSOCIATION
... Petitioner
Vs
1. BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. (BSNL),
... Respondent
2. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
For Petitioner :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS
For Respondent :SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN, SC, BSNL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :13/08/2008
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No.10508 of 2008
==================
Dated this the day of August, 2008
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an association of security guards. They are
challenging Ext.P6 notification issued by the 1st respondent
inviting tenders for award of contract for house keeping work in
their establishments. According to the petitioner, the security
guards already working are entitled to be engaged for the work.
The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs:
“(a) To declare that the works done by the DGR sponsored agencies
by employing Ex-servicemen security guards in the
establishments of the 1st respondent can be entrusted only to
such agencies in accordance with the Govt. of India, DGR
guidelines and to declare that the action of the 1st respondent in
denying work to Ex-servicemen security guards by entrusting
such works to private tenderers in terms of work (2) mentioned
in Ext.P6 is illegal, improper and ultravires.
(b) To call for the entire records leading to Ext.P6 and to issue a
Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order or
direction quashing the same, to the extend [sic] of allotment of
work (2) mentioned in Ext.P6.
(c) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ,
order or direction, directing the 1st respondent not to allot the
items of work shown as work (2) in Ext.P6, on the basis of
Ext.P6 proceedings.
(d) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ,
order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to continue to
allot the items of work shown as work (2) of Ext.P6, only to DGR
sponsored agencies employing not less than 90% work force
from among Ex-servicemen security guards and to further direct
the 1st respondent to permit the continuance of existing DGR
sponsored agencies employing Ex-servicemen security guards,
in the establishments of the 1st respondent in accordance withw.p.c.10508/08 2
the Govt. of India guidelines.
(e) To issue any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, directing
the 1st respondent to permit the continuance of Ex-servicemen
security guards employed by DGR sponsored agencies in the
establishment of the 1st respondent, even after 4 years, as
directed in Ext.P4 series.
(f) To call for the records leading to Ext.P5 & P5(a) and to issue a
writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing the same.”
2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st
respondent submits that the employees, whose cause is espoused
by the petitioner, were security guards deputed by the former
security agency to whom a contract was awarded for security
work in the establishments of the 1st respondent. The contract
period of that agency expired and in accordance with the scheme
framed by the Directorate General of Resettlement, a new
security agency has taken charge and the employees concerned
have already ceased to be working in the 1st respondent’s
establishments. They also submit that security agencies are
engaged strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the
Directorate General of Resettlement. Recording the above
submission, this writ petition is closed.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
w.p.c.10508/08 3