SANJAY RAM Vs. JHARKHAND GRAMIN BANK AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. Petitioner seeks regularization in the respondent Jharkhand Gramin Bank, stating that he has been working as a Sweeper -cum -Messenger on daily wage basis for about twelve years. The documents at Annexure -2/1 dated 23.7.2013 shows that he has been engaged as Daily Wage Messenger at Nagri Branch since 2009 for a period of four years. Other documents which the petitioner relies are Annexure -3 series, Annexure -4 and Annexure -5 series. These documents are photocopies of certain cheques which he claims to have been given to him for preparation of Outward Bills for Collection (OBC) in the respondent Bank at relevant points of time.

(2.) WHETHER such conduct of the petitioner to get photocopy of such fiduciary documents like a cheque book containing the signature of customer of the Bank while he was entrusted to prepare some Outward Bills for Collection in a Register, in itself is proper in the eye of law, is another question. However, even these documents do not inspire confidence that the claim of the petitioner's engagement for a period of twelve years on daily wage in the respondent Bank are substantiated. These cheques appear to be of the years 2014 and 2007 being the oldest. This would again not justify his contention that he has been in daily wage engagement for more than ten years. Apart from that, there are no such scheme for regularization under the respondent Bank which can entitle the petitioner for consideration for regularization under the respondents. In absence of any regularization scheme, the Writ Court is not supposed to issue direction for regularization of one or the other employee on the strength of his claim of daily wage engagement for a particular length of time, as it would be contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Constitution Bench judgment rendered in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi [ : (2006) 4 SCC 1] : [2006 (2) JLJR (SC) 282].