IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOS.3497-498 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. AIR FORCE EMPLOYEES UNION BENGALURU DISTRICT (AFFILIATED TO BHARTIYA PRATIRAKASHA MAZDOOR SANGH (BPMS) RECOGNIZED BY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SRI G THIRUKUMAR, AGE 65 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI GOPAL, NO.66, 4TH CROSS, OFFICERS MODEL COLONY, T.DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560057 2. SRI S SOLOMAN AGE 42 YEARS, S/O SRI SRIRAMULU, SECRETARY OF OUTGOING UNIT CIVILIANS COMMITTEE, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI WEST, BENGALURU-560015 (By MR. P A KULKARNI, ADV.) AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE DEFENCE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001 … PETITIONERS 2. CHIEF OF AIR STAFF VAYU BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110106 3. AIR OFFICER COMMANDING IN-CHARGE HEADQUARTERS TRAINING COMMAND, J.C.NAGAR POST, HEBBAL, BENGALURU-560006 4. AIR OFFICER COMMANDING AIR FORCE STATION JALAHALLI (WEST) BENGALURU-560015 5. SRI A GIRIBABU AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCN:PAINTER, LOGISTIC SECTION, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI (WEST) BENGALURU-560015.
6. SMT BINDU G AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCN:UDC, 16TS, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 7. SRI CHANDRASHEKAR B V AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCN:MOTOR TRANSPORT DRIVER MT STATION, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 8. SRI M SELVA MUTHU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCN:MULTI TASKING STAFF (MTS) SECURITY SECTION, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 9. SRI MANOJ A P AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCN:HOUSE KEEPING STAFF (HKS) COMMUNICATION TRAINING INSTITUTE SECTION, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 10.SRI P R SATHISH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS OCCN:COOK, EAST COOK HOUSE, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 11.SRI ARUN KUMAR A R AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCN:MESS STAFF, OFFICERS MESS, O/O AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI(WEST) BENGALURU-560015 … RESPONDENTS (By MR. THIMMANNA BHAT, CGC FOR R1-11S) - - -
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH/DISSOLVING THE UNIT CIVILIANS COMMITTEE (UCC) ELECTION PERTAINING TO R-5 TO 11 HELD ON 30.11.2017 BY THE AIR FORCE STATION, JALAHALLI WEST BENGALURU R-4 ALONG WITH THE NOTIFICATION DTD 11.12.2017 VIDE ANNX-S ISSUED BY R-4 HEREIN; AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.P.A.Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr.Thimmanna Bhat, learned Central Government counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 11.
2. The petitions are admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia seek a writ of certiorari seeking dissolution of Unit Civilians’ Committee (UCC) election pertaining to respondent Nos.5 to 7 which was held on 30.11.2017 by the Air Force Station, Jalahalli West, Bengaluru along with notification dated 11.12.2017. The petitioners also seek a writ of mandamus to respondent No.4 to hold the elections afresh in accordance with the requirements contained in Annexure-A.
4. When a query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioners with regard to the maintainability of the writ petitions in the light of the fact that this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can issue a writ only to enforce a fundamental right or a statutory right, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent No.4 has conducted the elections under the executive instructions contained in Annexure-A and while conducting the elections, the procedure laid down in the executive instructions issued by the respondents has been violated. Therefore, the writ petitions are maintainable.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Admittedly, the executive instructions issued by the respondent No.4 dated 20.11.1976 do not have any statutory status nor the headquarters have any statutory sanction. Learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to point out as to under which provision of law or under which Rule, the aforesaid instructions has been issued. Therefore, it is evident that the aforesaid instructions have no statutory status. If the elections have been held in violation of the aforesaid instructions, no statutory right of the petitioners is violated.
6. In the absence of violation of any statutory right of the petitioners, the writ petitions are not maintainable. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the matter. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to them under the law.
Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV