Point of Law: in cases of claims to absorption or regularization of service, the appropriate authority to go into such issues will be the industrial tribunal/court as determination of such claims would require inquiry into disputed questions of facts which cannot conveniently be made by High Courts in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

Heard Mr. Mihir Desai, learned senior counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Bhate, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr. Arshad Shaikh, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 6; and Mr. Adsule, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 to 16.

2. Sixty one petitioners have joined together and have instituted the present common proceeding under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Initially, at the time of filing the writ petition the prayer made was for setting aside and quashing Ex.A advertisement dated 03.08.2017 for direct recruitment to the post of 'watchman' (security guard) in the establishment of Food Corporation of India at Manmad in the District of Nasik, Maharashtra State. Further prayer made was for a direction to respondent Nos.4 and 5 to issue fresh advertisement giving due preference to the petitioners. Additional prayer was made for a direction to respondent No.4 to consider the case of the petitioners for regular appointment to the post of 'watchman' (security guard) in the establishment of respondent No.5 i.e., Area Manager, Food Corporation of India, Manmad by giving them preference and relaxation in the upper age limit as well as in academic qualification barring technical qualification.

3. According to the petitioners, they are working as ‘watchman’ (security guard) in the establishment of respondent No.5. Many of the petitioners are working as such since the year 2009. Details of the petitioners, such as, age, date of joining, educational qualification, caste category and the salary earned have been furnished in the form of a statement forming part of paragraph No.2 of the writ petition.

4. Respondent No.4 issued an advertisement dated 03.08.2017 for filling up 187 posts of ‘security guard’. Grievance of the petitioners is that while issuing the said advertisement respondent Nos.3 to 6 did not consider the case of the petitioners. That apart, the said advertisement was contrary to guidelines and circulars of Food Corporation of India (FCI).

5. It is stated that petitioners are working in clear vacancies in the post of 'watchman' (security guard) under respondent Nos.5 and 6. They are thus “workmen” as defined under section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is also stated that petitioners are working as home guards, having been selected and appointed as such under the Bombay Home Guards Act, 1947. As per directions and orders of the Commandant they had discharged their duties at the establishments of respondent Nos.3 to 5 working as watchman (security guard). It is the case of the petitioners that they had completed 240 days in each calendar year of service and that their service records are clean and unblemished.

6. It is in the above context that petitioners have contended that they are entitled to regularization of their services in the post of 'watchman' (security guard).

7. Petitioners have also relied upon circular dated OMISS-03-2013-03 dated 16/17.05.2013 issued by respondent No.3 which lays down guidelines for recruitment to the post of 'watchman' (security guard). It specifically provides for giving preference to casual employees engaged in Food Corporation of India (FCI) in any capacity and working as on 31.12.2012. It is the contention of the petitioners that while issuing the impugned advertisement respondent Nos.3 to 6 had failed to adhere to the guidelines laid down in the circular dated 16/17.05.2013.

8. After enactment of the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981 and when the provisions of the said Act were made applicable to Nasik and four other districts in the State of Maharashtra, respondent No. 5 registered itself with the Security Guards Board constituted under the said Act and also got the names of the petitioners registered on the guard pool prepared and maintained by the Security Guards Board, Nasik. Petitioners have pleaded that they are physically fit and eligible to be regularized in the