(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused record of the case, I find this petition to be totally devoid of substance and hence to be dismissed in limine.
(2.) By filing the writ petition, the petitioner says that he was working with the State Bank of India in Mandsour Branch as daily wager. He was then called for interview but was not selected. He says, others were selected, but he was not found fit. It is for this purpose, he says that his case should be sent to Labour Court under Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act by way of an industrial reference. Since no reference was made he has come up in writ.
(3.) I fail to understand the grievance of the writ petitioner. He cannot insist that he must be appointed, once he was called for interview by the Selection Committee of the Bank. Calling for an interview is one thing and selection of a petitioner on a particular post is other. If he was not found fit for the post for which he was called for interview, then in my opinion, there can be no dispute that can be referred for adjudication to the Labour Court. Indeed there is no industrial dispute which is capable being referred to Labour Court for adjudication under Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act. This Court cannot insist upon the Banks to appoint the petitioner to a particular post only because he was working with the Bank as a daily wager for quite some time. It is for the Selection Committee of the Bank to decide who is the best candidate for appointment on the particular post.