Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Harinder Singh vs M/O Communications on 9 December, 2022
1
Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 3301/2019
This the 9th day of December, 2022
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)
1. Shri Harinder Singh & Ors.
S/o Sh. Satbir Singh,
Age about 51 years, Group 'D'
Daily Wages Cleaner,
R/o. Lamba Mohalla, Shahibad,
Mohammadpur, South West
Delhi - 110 061.
2. Sh Shiv Kumar Rana
S/o Amar Bahadur Rana
Age about 57 years, Group 'D'
Daily Wages Cleaner,
R/o. H. No. 60/A, Aali Vihar Sarita Vihar,
South Delhi - 110 076.
3. Sh. Satyandra Kumar,
S/o Sh. Dhan Singh,
Age about 55 years, Group 'D'
Daily Wages Cleaner,
R/o. 82P-Ext Hastsal,
D. K. Mohan Garden S.O.
West Delhi - 110 059.
4. Sh. Dalbir Singh,
S/o Sh. Sardar Singh,
Age about 53 years, Group 'D'
Daily Wages Cleaner,
R/o. Gubhana (70),
Gobhana, Jhajjar, Haryana-124 507.
5. Sh. Sheotaj Singh
S/o Sh. Matadin,
2
Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019
Age about 53 years, Group 'D'
Daily Wages Cleaner,
R/o. Phaladpura (KharkhariBhima)
P.O. Bharawas, Rewari,
Haryana - 123 401. ....Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr. Ranjit Singh)
Versus
Ministry of Communication & IT
1. The Secretary
Ministry of Communication & IT
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marge,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. Senior Manager
Department of Posts,
Mail Motor Services,
Naraina, New Delhi - 110 028. ...Respondents
(By Advocate : Ms. Sumedha Sharma)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Member (J) The brief facts of the case are that the applicants who were appointed as outsourced cleaner group 'D' on daily wages basis through Employment Exchange, have been aggrieved with their discontinuation order dated 16.03.2009. According to the learned counsel for the applicants, the termination of the applicants were in violation of Articles of 14, 16 and 311 (2) of the 3 Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019 Constitution. According to the applicants, they were employed in Mail Motor Service for the period from 26.03.2007 to 08.06.2007. Thereafter, the pay scales of casual labourers were revised vide order dated 23.01.2012 on recommendation of 6th CPC and again it was revised in the year 2017 vide recommendations of 7th CPC.
2. It is stated by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have put in more than 10 years of service under the respondents and in the year 2018, they filed OA No. 3838/2018 before this Tribunal wherein the respondents were directed to consider their representation dated 11.06.2018 by passing a reasoned and speaking order. Vide impugned order dated 16.03.2019, the respondents have considered the representation of the applicants and dismissed the same being devoid of merits. Hence, they filed the present OA seeking the following reliefs :-
"(i) quash the impugned orders dated 16.03.2019 and 21.04.2018 orders passed by the respondent No.2 ;
(ii) Issue an appropriate order or directions to respondents to re-instate applicants with full back 4 Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019 wages with all consequential benefits, up to the age of superannuation.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Daily Rated Casual Labours vs. Union of India, 1988 SCC (1) 222, whereby the respondents were directed to give permanent employment who are being working since last 01 year in the Posts and Telegraphs Department.
4. Notices were issued to the respondents who put their appearance and filed detailed reply and stated that as per DoP&T OM dated 08.11.2000 the benefit is applicable to the canteen employees who are working in the non- statutory departmental canteens functioning from Central Government offices and the applicants are not employees of such canteen. It is also stated that the applicants were dis-engaged only after giving prescribed three weeks' notice and to meet the requirement of manpower of the department, the respondents have now floated a tender for outsourcing of cleaner (MTS) which was awarded to M/s. Peregrine Guarding Pvt. Ltd. It is further stated that the agency viz. Rajya Sainik Board and Delhi/Army 5 Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019 placement Node office Delhi, from where the applicants were outsourced did not participate in the tender. Thus, the applicants cannot be re-engaged.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. A short question raised by the applicants in this OA is whether they are entitled to be reinstated or not ?
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn our attention to decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with this issue by relying upon the decision in M.M.R. Khan vs. Union of India (1990) Supp SCC 191, and ultimately was of the view at para 18 that the respondents should consider the regularization of the appellants who was serving as canteen workers in consonance with the principles laid down in the State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi - AIR 2006 SC 1806. The said para is reproduced below :-
"18. Therefore, in the light of the settled principle enunciated hereinabove, we hold that the subject Canteen is a „Statutory Canteen‟ under the Factories Act, 1948 and that the learned Single Judge had arrived at the correct conclusion. In our opinion, the Division Bench of the High Court was not correct in taking a contrary view. We, therefore, allow these Appeals. We set aside the impugned Judgment 6 Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019 passed by the High Court, and direct the Respondents to treat the subject Canteen at Moradabad as a Statutory Canteen either under Section 46 of the Act or the relevant clauses of the Indian Railway Establishment Management. However, so far as the Appellants are concerned, we find it difficult to condone or ignore the fact that they were not appointed as per the regular recruitment procedure. To pass an order regularizing the services of all workers employed therein would necessarily imply ratification of appointments given outside the Constitutional scheme. We, therefore, direct the Respondents to consider regularizing the services of the Appellants presently serving as canteen workers in consonance with the principles laid down in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi AIR 2006 SC 1806 and take requisite action within six months of the receipt of this Judgment. Further, as and when the subject posts fall vacant the Respondents shall be bound to fill the posts by a regular process of selection. The Appellants in the present case shall be allowed to compete in the regular recruitment and the Respondents shall grant to them appropriate age relaxation as well as grant proper weightage for their having worked in the subject Canteen.
19. There cannot be any cavil that the necessity for canteen amenities to be available where more than 250 workmen are engaged, is an essential facet of human or labour rights. Managements and employers are duty bound to provide these basic facilities."
7. As per Rule 141, the judgment cited by the Hon'ble Apex Court is binding upon all the Courts below the Hon'ble Supreme Court and all concerned authorities. Thus, we have no hesitation to direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicants for regularization in accordance with the law laid down in Uma Devi (supra). 7
Item No. 36 (C-III) O.A. No. 3301/2019
8. In view of the above, this OA stands disposed of qua above observations. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Dr. Chhabilendra Roul) (Ashish Kalia)
Member (A) Member (J)
/Mbt/