- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 23012 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE NO.65, ST MARKS ROAD BANGALORE -560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. GENERAL MANAGER - HR THE PETITIONER IS PUBLIC SECTOR BANK ENGAGED IN THE BANKING BUSINESS AND IS GOVERNED BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B C PRABHAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR CFC BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA A C., ADVOCATE-ABSENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SUMMONS DATED 22.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 IN CASE NO.203/2022 (SERVICE)(ANNEXURE-J) AND QUASH THE SAID PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.203/2022. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner, State Bank of India is before this Court seeking quash of proceedings in Case No.203/2022 before the respondent -commission. 2. Case of the petitioner is that in terms of a merging scheme, that was entered into between the petitioner-bank and State Bank of Mysore, the employees of State Bank of Mysore were taken over by the petitioner-bank. However they were taken on casual/temporary basis and they were not given permanent post. 3. Being aggrieved the employees have approached this Court by filing a petition in W.P.No.13864-14080/2017 & 14094-14097/2017 seeking comprehensive relief in the nature - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 of direction to the petitioner-bank herein to absorb them into their establishment and not to alter their service conditions. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits this Court in the said writ petitions has protected the interest of the said persons by directing the petitioner-bank herein not to alter the service condition and petitioner-bank have retained the said employees and have been paid their rightful emoluments. He submits that the contention of the petitioner to regularize is pending consideration before this Court. 5. Things stood thus, he submits that the very same petitioners have approached the respondent-commission seeking very same relief which is impermissible. Pursuant to which the respondent-commission has issued the summons. He submits that two parallel proceedings one before this Court and one before the respondent-commission who has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the claim of the petitioner or the matter of this nature, is impermissible. Therefore seeks for quash of the proceedings. 6. Heard. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 7. Section 8 and 10 of the Karnataka State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2002 which confers powers and functions on the Commission does not envisage power and authority for them to adjudicate upon the issue as the one at hand. Sections 8 and 10 read as under: "Section 8 : Functions of the Commission : The functions of the commission shall be as follow: (a) to investigate and examine the working of various safeguards provided in the constitution of India or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the Government for the welfare and protection of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka and; (b) to inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguard of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka and to take up such matter with the appropriate authorities; (c) to participate and advise on the planning process of socio economic development of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and to evaluate the progress of their development in the State. (d) to make recommendations as to the measures that should be taken by the State for the effective implementation of safeguards and other measures for the protection, welfare and socio economic development of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and to make report to the State Government annually and at such other time as the Commission may deem fit. (e) to discharge such other functions in relation to the protection, welfare, development and advancement of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Provided that if any matter specified in this section is dealt with by the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes established under Article 338 of the Constitution of India the State Commission for Scheduled - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall cease to have jurisdiction on such matter.” Section 10 : Powers of Commission:- The Commission shall, while investigating any matter under section 8, have all the powers of a civil court in trying a suit and in particular, in respect of the following matters, namely: (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person from any part of the State and examining him on oath; (b) requiring the discovery and production of any document; (c) receiving evidence on affidavits; (d) requisitioning any public record or copy there of from any court or office; (e) issuing Commissions for the examination of witnesses and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed.” 8. Learned counsel for petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of ALL INDIA INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK SC AND ST EMPLOYEES’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION & OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in (1996) 6 SCC 606 wherein at paragraphs 10 and 11 the Apex Court has held as under: 10. Interestingly, here, in clause (8) of Article 338, the words used are “the Commission shall … have all the powers of the Civil Court trying a suit”. But the words “all the powers of a Civil Court” have to be exercised “while investigating any matter referred to in sub-clause (a) or inquiring into any complaint referred to in sub-clause (b) of clause 5”. All the procedural powers of a civil court are given to the Commission for the purpose of investigating and inquiring into these matters and that too for that limited purpose only. The powers of a civil - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 court of granting injunctions, temporary or permanent, do not inhere in the Commission nor can such a power be inferred or derived from a reading of clause (8) of Article 338 of the Constitution. 11. The Commission having not been specifically granted any power to issue interim injunctions, lacks the authority to issue an order of the type found in the letter dated 4-3-1993. The order itself being bad for want of jurisdiction, all other questions and considerations raised in the appeal are redundant. The High Court was justified in taking the view it did. The appeal is dismissed. No costs. 9. The interim order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.13864-14080/2017 and 14094-14097/2017 read as under: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is stated that the petitioners are all employees of the State Bank of Mysore and that they have rendered services well over a decade and in some instances for nearly over two decades. It is submitted that the second and third respondents have entered into an arrangement whereby the third respondent intends to acquire the business of the second respondent by way of Amalgamation and that the third respondent has put the petitioners on notice that only permanent and regular officers alone would be absorbed and retained in service. It is submitted that during the discussions held between the Management and the representatives of the employees of the second respondent, it was assured that the petitioners would be absorbed. The learned counsel for the petitioners would draw the attention of the Court to the meeting notings i.e. the record of discussions (Annexure-C held on 10.2.1982 and Annexure-D held on dated 12.6.1985) wherein the Management has assured that the temporary employees would be considered for absorption and hence she would submit that the stand of the third respondent is contrary to the understanding arrived at - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 between the representatives of the second respondent Bank employees and the Management of the second respondent. She would further submit that the petitioners apprehend that the second and third respondents are likely to terminate their services with effect from tomorrow i.e. 31.3.2017 and hence she prays for an interim order. Pending disposal of the writ petitions, the second and third respondent are restrained from altering the service conditions of the petitioners or terminating their services. Interim order shall operate till the next date of hearing. Issue emergent notice to the respondents returnable by 12.4.2017. Re-list on 13.4.2017. Process and requisite fees for issuance of emergent notice to be paid by 31.3.2017, failing which the interim order stands recalled. The petitioners to comply with the office objections by then." 10. Since the employees of State Bank of Mysore, now merged with the petitioner-bank have approached this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions and their interest is protected and considering the nature of relief sought by them which is also pending consideration before this Court, this Court under the circumstances does not deem it appropriate that a parallel proceedings be continued before the commission. Nonetheless the commission cannot under the provisions of the Act conduct a parallel proceedings of this nature. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32478 WP No. 23012 of 2022 11. In that view of the matter, petition is allowed. Proceedings in Case No.203/2022 before the respondent- commission is quashed. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44