Madras High Court
The Tamilnadu Civil Supplies ... vs G.Palani on 10 July, 2015
Author: M.Venugopal
Bench: Satish K. Agnihotri, M.Venugopal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.07.2015 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.A.No.924 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 The Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., rep by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, 42,Thambusamy Road, Chennai-10. .. Appellant Vs. 1.G.Palani 2.A.Krishnamurthy 3.G.Rajendran 4.T.Ramachandran 5.S.Ganesan 6.A.Anbarasan 7.N.Jayam 8.The State of Tamilnadu, rep by its Secretary to Government, Food, Cooperation and Consumer Protection Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-09. .. Respondents This writ appeal is preferred under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 11.03.2014 passed in W.P.No.10108 of 2008. For Appellant : Mr.P.Paramasiva Doss For Respondents : Mr.S.Venkataraman - - - - - JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was made by SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.) Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation / employer has filed this appeal, assailing the order dated 11th March, 2014 passed in W.P.No.10108 of 2008, whereunder the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.213, Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection (A1) Department dated 15th October, 1998 issued by the eight respondent herein and the consequential proceeding No.AE3/23706/07, dated 05th April, 2007 issued by the appellant herein, were quashed and fringe benefits given as regular packers to the writ petitioners were restored.
2 The indisputable facts in nutshell are the writ petitioners were working as casual labourers with the appellant corporation. By order dated 23rd June, 2000, on the basis of the decision dated 23rd September, 1997 of the Board of the Corporation, they were regularised in the regular time scale of pay of Rs.2550-55-2660-60-3200 with all benefits admissible and payable to the regular packers. They were initially appointed on probation for a period of two years. On successful completion of probation, they were declared as confirmed with effect from 27th June, 2002. All of a sudden, the fringe benefits of medical allowance, washing allowance, tea and dust allowance, surrender of earned leave, encashment of earned leave on death / retirement, leave travel concession and entitlement to consideration for compassionate ground appointment in case of death of an employee in service, were withdrawn by the aforestated order dated 05th April, 2007.
3 Feeling aggrieved, the writ petitioners filed the instant writ petition. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner sought an amendment to the effect of impleading the State of Tamil Nadu as second respondent and also questioning the legality of G.O.Ms.No.213 dated 15th October, 1998 issued by the second respondent therein along with consequential proceedings dated 05th April, 2007.
4 The learned Single Judge, noticing the fact that there was no distinction between the packers appointed through the employment exchange and absorbed from the casual labourers, on the basis of two different sources, quashed the proceedings and directed the appellant corporation herein to restore the benefits as granted at the time of their regularisation.
5 The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the services of the petitioners were absorbed on the basis of their working as casual labourers when the regular packers were appointed on the basis of the list drawn from the employment exchange. The source of appointment on the post of regular packers is not that of absorption of casual workers, but through selection on the basis of the list submitted by the employment exchange. Thus, the petitioners constitute different class and are not entitled to equal treatment at par with the regular packers appointed through employment exchange.
6 We have carefully examined the aforestated submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto.
7 The packers are appointed by way of selection on the basis of the list drawn from the employment exchange. Noticing the working of the instant writ petitioners, as casual labourers, the management Board of the Corporation took the decision on 23rd September, 1997 to regularise their services on absorption by granting regular time scale of pay. On the basis of the proceedings dated 31st December, 1999 with effect from 28th June, 2000, they were appointed on probation for a period of two years and it was also confirmed.
8 There is no dispute that the petitioners were working as casual labourers. The corporation took the decision to regularise the services of 215 casual labourers, who have rendered 480 days of service subject to the suitability that they are physically fit and also not crossing the age of superannuation. It is also stated that they will not be treated on par with the regular employees in G.O.Ms.No.213 dated 15th October, 1998. However, when the petitioners were absorbed on regular time scale of pay for a period of two years on probation, they were given all fringe benefits, as aforestated, at par with the other regular packers appointed through employment exchange. Subsequently, by the impugned order dated 05th April, 2007, the aforestated fringe benefits were withdrawn on the basis of the report submitted by the Committee.
9 There is no quarrel that there was no difference in the working pattern and also the nature of the working between the packers appointed on absorption from casual labourers and the regular packers recruited through employment exchange. The only difference was the source of appointment, one was through employment exchange and the other was on absorption. The appointment of the writ petitioners as packers was on absorption as against the packers selected through public employment exchange. The authorities have created this apartheid, i.e., segregation on race, on the basis of source of appointment. This segregation on the basis of source of selection is not based on rationality or reasonableness. The only condition prescribed under service regulation is that packers is to be appointed on probation. In the case on hand also, on absorption as regular basis, the probation period was not dispensed with and they have to undergo the probation. Only on having completed successful probation, they were made regular and permanent packers. Even for absorption of casual employees, there was proper selection to the extent of being physically fit and not crossing the age of superannuation and as such, the discrimination is unsustainable in the eye of law and the same is impermissible.
10 The service conditions of employees of the appellant corporation are governed by the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., Employees Service Regulations, 1989. Under Clause (r) of Regulation 4, regular employee of the corporation is defined as an employee whose probation has been declared to have been satisfactorily completed in any post of the corporation. There is no other definition of regular employee. An employee has been defined under clause (i) of Regulation 4 that Employee means an employee of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation on contract Ltd., Madras and includes persons employed by the Corporation on contract or on deputation. The temporary employee is defined as any employee of the Corporation who is not regular. Thus, under the regulations, there can be only two types of employees, either temporary employee or regular employee. As aforestated, regular employee means who has satisfactorily completed probation in any post of the Corporation.
11 Indisputably, the writ petitioners were appointed on probation for a period of two years. They have completed probation satisfactorily and were declared as confirmed with effect from 27th June, 2002. The regulations do not distinguish on the basis of the mode of selection between one regular employee and other regular employee and as such, the distinction cannot be created by way of orders, executive instructions contrary to the statutory provisions of regulations.
12 The learned Single Judge has rightly held that the discrimination is impermissible and the petitioners are entitled to same benefits what was given to them at the time of regularisation and continued thereafter. Thus, the withdrawal of the said fringe benefits by the impugned order dated 05th April, 2007 was bad and rightly quashed.
13 For the reasons and analysis herein-above, we do not find any ground to take a contrary view than that of the one taken by the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. However, on request of the learned counsel for the appellant, four weeks time from today is granted to comply with the order dated 11th March, 2014 of the learned Single Judge. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.K.A., J.) (M.V., J.)
10.07.2015
Index : Yes
vvk
To
The Secretary to Government,
The State of Tamilnadu,
Food, Cooperation and Consumer Protection Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-09.
SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.
and
M.VENUGOPAL, J.
vvk
W.A.No.924 of 2015
10.07.2015