Mumbai: The Bombay high court has dismissed a petition by a union seeking the continuation of security guards deployed on the Indian Institute of Technology-Bombay campus. Justices Riyaz Chagla and Advait Sethna on Friday held that “the guards have no vested right in being retained with respondent-IIT and the petitioner-union cannot compel IIT to continue the security guards/members of the petitioner... There can be no permanent attachment of those security guards to IIT.” The petition was filed by Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshak and General Kamgar Union, representing 81 security guards. As the IIT-B was registered with the Security Guards Board for Greater Mumbai and Thane, the board sent it the security guards. However, on Aug 11, 2025, their services were terminated with effect from Oct 10, 2025. The board’s inspection of the IIT-B premises found that private security guards were engaged.The union’s advocate, Avinash Belge, and the board’s advocate, Amardev Uniyal, argued that as IIT is registered as a principal employer, there is a statutory obligation to engage guards allotted by the board.The judges found merit in IIT advocate Amrut Joshi’s submission that the petition is not maintainable as the union or its members have no privity of contract with IIT, adding, “There is no employer-employee relationship between them.” At the highest, there is privity between IIT and the board that chose not to challenge the termination of the contract. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the judges said it is well settled that security guards deployed through the board do not become employees of the principal employer.The petition is also “thoroughly misconceived” as there is no deprivation of any benefits under the Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act and a scheme under it, “particularly when the respondent-board can always redeploy these security guards at any other establishment.” Considering that there is an Oct 2025 interim order to continue the security guards employed by the board, the judges stayed the judgment for four weeks to enable the union to appeal in the Supreme Court.
