A writ petition was dismissed concerning the dis-empanelment of a security agency. The petitioner claimed cash payments to guards were due to compelling reasons and directive changes, but the Court rejected this, holding express Guidelines mandated bank transfers to prevent wage embezzlement.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~53
GP CAPT A W THOMAS (RETD) AND ANR. ..... Petitioners Through Mr Abhishek R. Shukla, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr Dev P. Bhardwaj, Advocate for UOI/R1 and R2. Mr K.K. Tyagi, Advocate for R3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 12.12.2018
agency by 1st of every month. Payment to security guards/supervisors will be done by ECS/Cheque on by the security agency by 7th of each month. In case the salary is not paid by ECS/cheque due to compelling reasons, DGR will be intimated accordingly. (Authority- Amendment issued vide Para 7 of Office memorandum 28(3)/2012/D(Res-I) dated 16 January 2013).”
paying the guards less than the minimum wages against receipts of the full amount. It was thus, necessary for the petitioner to duly comply with the same.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
DECEMBER 12, 2018 pkv
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to protection against dis-empanelment after paying guards in cash despite Guidelines requiring ECS/Cheque payments.
Whether compelling reasons or delayed respondent payments justify payment by cash to security guards.
Whether the failure to inform the respondent about the cash payment renders the justification unsustainable.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
GP Capt A W Thomas
Union of India
Vibhu Bakhu
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
