Trichy Region Ex-servicemen and Family Welfare Association v. The Union of India

1BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 08.06.2011CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE K.SUGUNAANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.ARUMUGHASWAMYW.A.(MD).Nos.46 and 47 of 2011and M.P.Nos.1,2,1 and 2 of 2011Trichy Region Ex-servicemen and Family Welfare Association,Represented by its President,P.Renganathan,DD5, Housing Unit,Salai Road, Uraiyur,Trichy 3.: Appellant in Both Writ AppealsVs.1.The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare, Ministry of Defense, New Delhi 1.2.The Director General Re-settlement, The Government of India, Ministry of Defense, West Block – IV, R.K.Puram, New Delhi 1.3.Tamil Nadu Ex-servicemen Corporation (TEXCO), Government of Tamil Nadu Undertaking), Represented by its Managing Director, Major Parameswaran Memorial Building, No.2, West Mada Street, Sri Nagar Colony, Saidapet, Chennai 15.4.The Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai, Chennai.5.The Principal General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Trichy – 1. : Respondents in both WA'sPRAYER: Writ Appeals are filed under Clause 15 of the LettersPatent against the Order dated 11.11.2010 made in W.P.(MD).Nos.10233 of 2008 and 5266 of 2009 on the file of this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2Prayer in WP.No.10233 of 2008:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, praying for the issue of a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugnednotice passed by the 5th respondent in No.G2/GS-IV/SGS-Rearrangements/2007-2008/19/dated at Trichy the 20.10.2008 andto quash the same and consequently to direct the 5th respondentto continue to employ the members of the Petitioner associationsponsored by the 3rd respondent from time to time as done before.Prayer in WP.No.5266 of 2009:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing thefifth respondent to reinstate the removed 61 members of thePetitioner association ex-servicemen security guards andconsequently to direct the fifth respondent not to reduce theex-servicemen security guards for 5th respondent concern. For Appellant: Mr.T.A.EbenezerFor Respondents1&2: Mr.K.RamakrishnanSenior Panel Counsel for Central GovernmentFor Respondents 4&5: Mr.K.MuraliFor Mr.K.GovindarajanCOMMON JUDGMENT**********************[Judgment of the Court was delivered BY K.SUGUNA, J]These Writ Appeals have been filed challenging a CommonOrder dated 11.11.2010 passed in W.P.(MD).Nos.10233 of 2008 and5266 of 2009.2. W.P.(MD).No.10233 of 2008 was filed challenging a noticedated 20.10.2008 issued by the fifth respondent herein and for adirection to the fifth respondent to continue to employ themembers of the appellant association as Security Guards. 3. As far as Writ Petition (MD).No.5266 of 2009 isconcerned, it was filed for the issue of a Writ of Mandamusdirecting the fifth respondent to reinstate the removed 61members of the appellant association as Security Guards andconsequently direct the fifth respondent not to reduce themembers of Ex-servicemen Security Guards. By Common Order dated11.11.2010, the learned Single Judge had dismissed the said WritPetitions. Challenging the said order, the present Writ Appealshave been filed.4. According to the learned counsel appearing for theappellant association, the members of the appellant associationare Ex-servicemen and after discharge from Military service, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3through the appellant association, who is a Recruiting Agency,they were engaged as Security Guards in BSNL Office. Now, inview of the policy taken by the BSNL to reduce the SecurityGuards, the notice dated 20.10.2008 was issued. The grievance ofthe appellant association is that in view of the said notice,they were removed from service and by the retrenchment stepstaken by the fifth respondent, the members of the appellantassociation have lost their job, and therefore, the notice dated20.10.2008 is to be set aside.5. We are not inclined to accept the said stand of thelearned counsel for the appellant association, for the reasonthat an establishment has its own right to decide the number ofemployees to be engaged and this Court cannot insist anyestablishment for the sake of Ex-servicemen to have more numberof Security Guards than it is required. However, some welfaremeasures have been introduced for the sake of Ex-servicemen.Therefore, we are of the opinion that though they were removedfrom service, in view of the policy taken by the fifthrespondent, they should be provided with alternative employment. 6. In an identical circumstance, a Division Bench of thisCourt in W.A.(MD).No.372 of 2010, by Judgment dated 05.08.2010,wherein one of us [KSAJ] is a party, had held as follows:-5. Today, it is submitted by the learnedAdditional Solicitor General that as on date, numberof vacancies are available through out the State ofTamil Nadu, and therefore, if the appellants approachthe second respondent, certainly, through therecruitment agency, they will be accommodated whereverthere are vacancies available within the State ofTamil Nadu.6. In view of the above submission made, theappellants are directed to make applications beforethe second respondent within a period of ten days fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this Order and onreceipt of the such applications from the appellants,the second respondent is directed to furnishparticulars with regard to the establishments wherethe recruitment agency monitored by the secondrespondent can supply employees as Security Guards andthe second respondent is directed to consider suchapplications of the appellants and pass orders withina period of two weeks thereafter. The secondrespondent, as a monitoring agency, is furtherdirected to examine and to see the accommodation ofthese appellants in the respective establishmentswherever there are vacancies available within theState of Tamil Nadu."7. Since it was the stand of the learned AdditionalSolicitor General, who had appeared in the said Writ Appeal,that vacancies are available, we are of the opinion that themembers of the appellant association herein are also entitledfor the same relief. In view of the above, since the Tamil Nadu https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4Ex-servicemen Corporation (TEXCO), the third respondent herein,is a Recruiting Agency with regard to the employment aspect ofthe Ex-servicemen, if there is any possibility of accommodatingthe ousted members of the appellant association, the thirdrespondent herein is directed to accommodate them in otherestablishments, for which also the third respondent is aRecruiting Agency and the Monitoring Agency, i.e., the secondrespondent herein is also directed to work out the possibilityof accommodating the ousted members of the appellant associationin any other establishments wherever their services are requiredand the ousted members of the appellant association are also atliberty to make applications before the second respondent withregard to the further appointment/engagement as Security Guardsand on receipt of the such applications from the members of theappellant association, the second respondent is directed tofurnish particulars with regard to the establishments, where theRecruitment Agency monitored by the second respondent can supplyemployees as Security Guards and the second respondent is alsodirected to take appropriate steps for accommodating the oustedmembers of the appellant association.These Writ Appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Nocosts. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions areclosed. Sd/-Deputy Registrar(LA)/True Copy/Assistant Registrar To1. The Secretary to Government, The Union of India, Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare, Ministry of Defense, New Delhi 1.2.The Director General Re-settlement, The Government of India, Ministry of Defense, West Block – IV, R.K.Puram, New Delhi 1.3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Ex-servicemen Corporation (TEXCO), Government of Tamil Nadu Undertaking), Major Parameswaran Memorial Building, No.2, West Mada Street, Sri Nagar Colony, Saidapet, Chennai 15.4.The Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai, Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

55.The Principal General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Trichy – 1.+One CC to Mr.T.A.Ebenezer, Advocate,SR.No.17697+One Cc to Mr.M.K.Ramakrishnan, Advocate, SR.No.17604+Two Ccs to Mr.K.GOvindarajan, Advocate, SR.Nos.17722 and 17723NBrl/10c – 24.6.2011 COMMON JUDGMENT MADE INW.A.(MD).Nos.46 and 47 of 201108.06.2011