AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.M. Appl. No. 36583/2016 (for exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No. 9041/2016
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India by the petitioner which is said to be an NGO being a trust registered
under the Indian Trust Act, 1882. The petitioner is "Central Bank Retirees
Grievances Cell".
In this writ petition the petitioner claims the relief of directions to be
issued to all public sector banks that in case of a penalty of
removal/dismissal from services is imposed then the outstanding leave
should be allowed to be encashed and be paid along with interest.
It is a well settled law in view of a catena of judgments of the
Supreme Court that in service matters a Public Interest Litigation petition
does not lie. One such recent judgment of the Supreme Court is in the case
of Bholanath Mukherjee and Others Vs. Ramakrishna Mission
Vivevkananda Centenary College and Others, (2011) 5 SCC 464.
There is a reason why in service matters a writ petition cannot be
filed on behalf of an association for various individual persons because if
any action for contempt has to be taken against individual persons such
action cannot be taken by the Court against individual persons who are not
before the Court and are only being represented by a body/association, such
as in the present case.
Since the petitioner is not a living person and is only an NGO, rights
of such an NGO are different from the rights of an individual person, and
rights of an individual person as per service matters law can only be
enforced by such individual persons by seeking appropriate writs of
certiorari, mandamus and/or any other appropriate order. Petitioner can only
have locus standi if any personal rights of the petitioner were involved as an
NGO but not on account of petitioners pleadings to be representing thousands
and lakhs of employees of public sector banks.
After arguments I have put it to the counsel for the petitioner that the
aforesaid legal position is an settled legal position and therefore the present
writ petition, since is not maintainable, can be withdrawn with liberty to each
individual employee of the Bank who seeks rights to file appropriate
independent proceedings, but the counsel for the petitioner after instructions
says that a judgment be passed.
In view of the above discussion the present writ petition filed by the
petitioner is one where petitioner clearly has no locus standi, in service matters
a Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable, individual employees of the
banks are not before this Court and nor can be because thousands and lakhs of
persons cannot come together as petitioners in one case.
Accordingly, this writ petition being wholly misconceived is
accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited with
Friendicoes, No.271 & 273, Defence Colony, Flyover Market, Jangpura Side,
New Delhi-110024, within ten days from today.