Krantikari Suraksha Rakshak Sanghatana v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6414 OF 2019 Krantikari Suraksha Rakshak Sanghatana .....Petitioner versus Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and ors.

....Respondents Ms. Jane Cox i/b. Ms.Karishma Rao, advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Martina Sapkal i/b. Arun Sapkal & co., advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Mr. A. J. Uniyal, advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 30th AUGUST, 2019.

P. C. :

1.

Ms. Sapkal, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, on instructions, makes a statement that respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall not appoint private security guards except through respondent No.3. The statement is accepted.

2.

In addition to above statement, on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Ms. Elizabeth Jacob, has also filed an affidavit-cum-undertaking dated 30th August, 2019. In this affidavit, following undertakings are given.

(i) The Respondents No.1 and 2 herein shall not appoint any private security guards to do the work Shubhada S Kadam 1/3

carried out by the Security Guards in any manner whatsoever as per the Letter No.SGB/2006-356 dated 07/06/2006;

(ii) The 9 members whose names are shown as security guards engaged by the Respondents No.1 and 2 through Respondent No.3 will be continued as per requirement of the Respondent No.1 until policy decision is taken in consultation with the Respondent No.3;

(iii) The payment of wages of the Petitioner shall be cleared and paid to the Respondent No.3 as per the terms of Letter No.SGB/2006-356 dated 07/06/2006 as also as per the provisions laid down under the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981;

The above undertakings given in the affidavit are accepted. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, makes a grievance that payment of wages of the petitioner's members have not been cleared by respondent Nos.1 and 2. If that be so, respondent No.3Board shall take appropriate action against respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shubhada S Kadam 2/3

4.

In the above facts and circumstances, the grievance raised in the petition, no more survives for consideration and the writ petition is disposed off as such.

5.

The interim relief shall stand vacated.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] Shubhada S Kadam 3/3