IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9534 of 2010 1. KANHAIYA CHAUDHARY S/O RAM SEVAK CHAUDHARY R/O VILL.- PAURI, P.S. BAHERA, DISTT.- DARBHANGA Versus 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS ZONAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE, MUZAFFARPUR 2. THE ASSISTANT ZONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, BENIPUR, DARBHANGA with CWJC No.11805 of 2010 1. BARUN KUMAR S/O LATE DWARIK RAUT R/O VILL.- GANGTI, P.O.- MAUN, P.S. BARBIGHA, DISTT.- SHEKHPURA Versus 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, WEST GANDHI MAIDAN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, REGION-V, BHAGALPUR 3. THE CHIEF ZONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, JUDGES COURT ROAD, PATNA 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, BARBIGHA BRANCH, SHEKHPURA ----------- For the petitioners : Mr. T.N.Maitin, Senior Advocate -with- M/S Surendra Kishore Thakur & K.C.K.Sinha, Advocates. For the Bank : M/S S.D.Sanjay, Akash Chaturvedi, Advocates. ======== 7. 03.08.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the “Bank”), who has filed counter affidavit in both the writ petitions, which is taken on record. 2. Petitioner in the two writ applications were engaged as Canteen Boy with effect from 1.4.1990 and 1.4.1986. They have been serving as Canteen Boy as also Messenger as and when required by the officers of the Branch and in lieu of such discharge of duties as a Canteen Boy or - 2 - Messenger they are being paid wages. Having served the Branch as Canteen Boy/Messenger when they were not considered for regularization they approached this Court by filing the writ petition praying, inter alia, to direct the Bank to absorb them as Messengers stating that from time to time the Chief/Branch Manager of the Branch where they have been serving as Canteen Boy-cum-Messenger have been recommending their case for permanent absorption in the subordinate cadre of the Bank. Necessary recommendations made in favour of the two petitioners by the Chief/Branch Manager concerned has also been annexed with the writ petition(s). By filing supplementary affidavit in C.W.J.C.No. 9534 of 2010 petitioner has also placed on record the names of the few employees of the Bank who were initially engaged as a Canteen Boy/Messenger and have been regularized in the subordinate cadre of the Bank. Two such names have been given in the supplementary affidavit that is of Ram Chandra Mehtar, son of Jaleshwar Mehtar and Ramesh Mandal. 3. Counsel for the Bank, however, has opposed the prayer made in the writ petitions. He states that Canteen Boys were earlier regularized in the light of the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as one time measure and thereafter there is no scheme in the Bank which entitle the daily-wager(s) to be regularized in the subordinate cadre of the Bank and the prayer made in the petitions being wholly misconceived is fit to be rejected. Along with the counter affidavit counsel for the Bank, however, has enclosed circular of the Bank dated - 3 - 6.4.1991 which provides for absorption of temporary employees pursuant to bipartite agreement dated 27.10.1988 and 9.1.1991. It is also not disputed by learned counsel for the Bank that petitioner Kanhaiya Chaudhary was engaged with effect from 1.4.1990 and is presently serving as a Canteen Boy-cum-Messenger in the same Branch in which he was engaged initially. So far petitioner Barun Kumar is concerned from the counter affidavit it appears that his engagement was terminated pursuant to the decision of the Local Implementation Committee dated 22.5.2008 ignoring the recommendation made for his regularization under letters contained in Annexure-3 series, Annexures 10 and 11. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, the admitted position which is emerging is that Bank or its Local Implementation Committee engaged the petitioners on daily wage basis to serve the Branch as Canteen Boy/Messenger. The submission of the counsel for the Bank that there does not exist any scheme for absorption/regularization of the daily wage earners in the Bank does not appear to be correct in view of the circular of the Bank dated 6.4.1991 which has been issued by the Personnel Department of the Bank pursuant to bipartite agreement dated 27.10.1988 and 9.1.1991 providing for absorption of temporary employees. It is, thus, quite evident that the Bank having considered the exigency of engaging the daily-wagers like the petitioners and others have provided for a scheme for their absorption/regularization under circular dated 6.4.1991 in the light of the bipartite - 4 - agreement. In the circumstances, there is light after the dark tunnel for the daily-wagers/Canteen Boys serving the different Branches of the Bank. Had there been no scheme for regularization of the daily wagers serving the Branch of the Bank engagement of daily wagers would have been exploitation violative of the directives contained in Article 39 of the Constitution. Accordingly, this Court directs the competent authority of the Bank to consider the case of the petitioner of the two writ applications along with all other eligible persons for absorption in the light of the circular dated 6.4.1991 taking into account the past service rendered by them, as early as possible, in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the competent authority of the Bank. 5. The writ applications are, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)