Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 24, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Managing Director State Bank Of ... vs Bhavnagar Jilla Mazdoor Sangh ... on 21 April, 2017

Author: Sonia Gokani

Bench: Sonia Gokani

                  /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                          JUDGMENT




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15460 of 2011



         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



         HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

         ==========================================================

         1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
               to see the judgment ?

         2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

         3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
               the judgment ?

         4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of
               law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
               India or any order made thereunder ?

         ==========================================================
             MANAGING DIRECTOR STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus
              BHAVNAGAR JILLA MAZDOOR SANGH C/O.MANIBHAI GANDHI &
                                 2....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR MIHIR THAKORE, SR. ADV. with MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE for
         the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR DG SHUKLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         MR P P MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         MR SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 , 3
         ==========================================================

             CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI




                                          Page 1 of 55

HC-NIC                                  Page 1 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
             /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                           JUDGMENT



                                 Date : 21/04/2017


                                 ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This challenge is made by the petitioner State Bank  of   Saurashtra,   which   is   now   merged   into   the   State  Bank of India, under Article 226 of the Constitution  of   India,   to   the   award   passed   by   the   Industrial  Tribunal,   Bhavnagar   ("the   Tribunal"   for   short)   in  Reference   I.T.C(New)   No.5   of   2009,   whereby   the  Tribunal   has   declared   three   employees   of   the   State  Bank   of   Saurashtra   as   the   employees   of   the   State  Bank of India, Bhavnagar and granted all benefits.

2. The facts in capsulized form are as follows:­ 2.1 Respondent   No.2   is   running   consumer   store   in  the   name   and   style   of   "State   Bank   of   Saurashtra  Employees   Consumer   Co­operative   Stores",   which   is  registered under the Gujarat Co­operative Societies  Act, 1961 under No.BH/1144 dated   On 29.7.1965. The  said store is also covered  under the provisions  of  Bombay   Shops   and   Establishment   Act   in   order   to  provide   essential   commodities   of   good   quality   at  reasonable price to all its members. It is the say  of   the   petitioner   that   the   Executive   Committee   of  the Store employs its own workers to run the stores  Page 2 of 55 HC-NIC Page 2 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT and fixes the terms of employment applicable to the  concerned employees and there is a separate body for  maintenance and administration of the said consumer  store. 

2.2 Three   employees   of   the   store,   namely,   Shri  Jitubhai   B.   Zankhara,   Shri   Dilipbhai   B.   Mandaviya  and   Shri   Kishor   C.   Sheth   had   been   employed  respectively   as   Class­IV   and   Class­III   employees. 

Shri   Jitubhai   worked   as   salesman   since   1978   and  retired   on   31.5.2002,   whereas   Shri   Dilipbhai  Mandaviya was working as Weighman, Class­IV and the  employee from 8.4.1984 and Shri Kishorbhai Sheth was  also   working   as   a   Weighman,   Class­IV   workman   with  effect from 6.3.1990. Both of them had retired till  August,   2012.   By   their   letters   dated   31.5.1991   and  15.2.1992, they raised a demand before the erstwhile  State   Bank   of   Saurashtra   to   treat   them   as   regular  employees of the Bank. As no heed was paid to such  request,   they   had   referred   the   matter   to   the  Assistant Labour Commissioner, Ahmedabad. On account  of   failure   of   this   conciliation   proceedings,   the  matter was referred to the Tribunal for adjudication  by   way   of   Reference   I.T.C.(Old)   NO.12   of   1994   and  now the new number is I.T.C.(New) NO.5 of 2009. The  terms   of   reference   mentioned   in   the   Schedule   of  Page 3 of 55 HC-NIC Page 3 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Reference are as follows:­ THE SCHEDULE "Whether  the three employees  of State  Bank of  Saurashtra Employees Consumer Co­op. Store Ltd.  are   the   workmen   of   State   Bank   of   Saurashtra,  Bhavnagar?   If   so,   whether   the   demand   of   the  Bhavnagar Jilla Mazdoor Sangh for treating them  as   regular   employees   of   State   Bank   of  Saurashtra   is   justified?   What   relief,   if   any,  the workmen are entitled?"

3. The Union has filed the statement of claim. It was  contended   that   the   petitioner­Bank,   as   per   its  policy  and rules published in the Bank for welfare  activity   of   its   employees,   started   a   store  exclusively   for   the   benefit   of   Bank   employees.   The  Managing   Director   of   the   Bank   is   the   Chairman   of  respondent   No.2­Store   and   the   Manager   or   the  Accountant   of   the   Store   is   appointed   by   the  petitioner­Bank.   The   salary   is   to   be   paid   to   the  Manager   and   Accountant   not   as   the   employee   of  respondent   No.2   Stores.   The   land,   building,  furniture and fixtures as well as stationary are all  provided   by   the   petitioner­Bank   itself.   It   was  conducting   audit   of   the   Books   of   Accounts   of     the  Store employees. It was also further contended that  one of the workman, namely, Shri Kishorbhai C. Sheth  was   absorbed   in   the   Bank   in   the   year   1984.   One  Smt.Pravinaben   widow   of   Shri   Suresh   V.   Shah,     an  Page 4 of 55 HC-NIC Page 4 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT employee   of   the   Stores   was   appointed   on  compassionate   ground   by   the   petitioner­   Bank   along  the   line   of   other   regular   employees.   Thus,   the  petitioner­Bank   and   respondent   No.2­Store   are   not  separate and distinct. It is also further contended  that   the   Petitioner­Bank   had   also   absorbed   the  employees  of canteen at its Head Office as regular  employee of the Bank.
4. Written Statement has been filed by the petitioner­ Bank on 11.7.1995. The petitioner­Bank submitted an  application   on   16.10.1995   before   the   Tribunal   to  join respondent No.2­Store as a necessary party. 
5. The list of documents along with copy of withdrawal  form was used by the Bank employees. Both the sides  adduced   oral   evidence   as   well   and   after   written  arguments,   the   Tribunal   allowed   the   Reference   and  directed   the   petitioner­Bank   to   treat   all   these  three  employees  of the Stores  as the Bank employee  with   effect   from   1.4.1994   along   with   some   other  directions. 
6. Aggrieved petitioner­Bank is before this Court with  the following reliefs:­ "11. The   petitioner   therefore   prays   that   this  Hon'ble   Court   may   be   pleased   to   issue   an  appropriate   writ,   order   or   direction   and   be  Page 5 of 55 HC-NIC Page 5 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT pleased:
A. to   call   for   the   record   of   proceeding   of  Reference   I.T.C(New)   No.5/2009   from   the   Ld.  Industrial   Tribunal   Central,   Bhavnagar   and   after  perusing   the   same,   to   quash   and   set   aside   the  award   dated   30.06.2010   passed   by   the  Ld.Industrial   Tribunal,   Central,   Bhavnagar   in  Reference I.T.C(New)No.5/2009.  B. to   stay,   pending   the   hearing   and   final  disposal   of   the   present   Special   Civil  Application,   the   operation   and   implementation   of  the Award dated 30.06.2010. 
C. provide for the costs of this Special Civil  Application.
D. pass   such   other   and   further   orders   as   this  Hon'ble   Court   deems   fit   and   proper   in   the   facts  and circumstances of the case." 

7. Affidavit­in­reply   is   filed   by   respondent   No.1,  raising all contentions and providing chronology of  events   which   had   taken   place   and,   which   eventually  led   to   preferring   the   Reference   and   as   to   how   the  sequence of events also led to passing of award in  favour of the respondents.

 

8. Respondent No.2 has also filed its affidavit. It is  his say that there is a relationship of master and  servant between the respondent and the member of the  Union   of   respondent   No.2,   who   has   preferred  Reference before the Tribunal. It was not compulsory  for   the   Bank   employees   to   become   members   of   the  respondent   No.2­Store.   The   employees   of   the   store  cannot be said to be employees of the Bank.




                                      Page 6 of 55

HC-NIC                              Page 6 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
                /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                           JUDGMENT




9. In this backdrop of facts, if one looks at some of  the   orders   passed   by   this   Court,   initially,   this  Court, on the ground of delay and latches, had not  entertained   the   petition.   Letters   Patent   Appeal  No.2060   of   2011   was   preferred,   where   this   Court  Coram   (V.M.Sahai   &   A.J.Desai,   J.J.)   allowed   the  appeal  on the ground  that the Coordinate Bench had  not considered the grounds of delay and latches put­ forth   by   the   petitioner­Bank   in   right   perspective. 

The   Court   had   allowed   the   appeal   quashing   and  setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge  and delay of eight months in filing the petition had  been condoned. It is remanded back to this Court to  decide it afresh on merit at the earliest. Such an  order came to be passed on 20.12.2011. 

10. Once   the   matter   came   back   before   the   learned  Single   Judge,   this   Court   (Coram:K.S.Jhaveri,   J.),  vide   order   dated   29.3.2012   passed   in   Special   Civil  Application   No.   15460   of   2011,   after   hearing   both  the   sides,   chose   not   to   grant   interim   relief   by  holding   that   this   would     amount   to   allowing   the  appeal at interim stage. 

"11.0 The   Tribunal   after   considering   the  evidence   on   record,   has   come   to   the   conclusion  Page 7 of 55 HC-NIC Page 7 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT that the employees  of the consumer shop are the  employees of the bank and has given the benefits  almost   after   17   years.   In   that   view   of   the  matter,   granting   interim   relief   will   amount   to  allowing this petition  at this stage and at the  same   time   if   interim   relief   is   not   granted   no  prejudice   is   likely   to   be   caused   to   the  petitioner.   The   respondents   who   are   working   in  the   cooperative   society   have   been   deprived   of  their   legitimate   rights   since   long   and   the  competent   Court     has   decided   the   same   after   18  years. Therefore this is not a case where interim  relief   is   required   to   be   granted.   Hence   the  interim relief is refused." 

11. Thus,   the   judgment   and   award   though   not  stayed, no benefit has accrued in favour of the  employees so far.

12. This Court has heard learned Senior Advocate  Mr.Mihir   Thakore   with   learned   advocate   Mr.Desai  for   the   petitioner.   He   firstly   urged   that   the  store not being an industry, the reference itself  is  bad   by   relying  on  the   decisions   of  G.M.ONGC   Shilchar   vs.   ONGC   Contractual   Workers   Unions   reported in  2008 (3) LLN 490  and in the case of  Indian   Overseas   Bank   vs.   Indian   Overseas   Bank   Staff Canteen Workers Union and another reported  in 2002(2)LLN 930. 

12.1 The legal preposition given by the learned  Page 8 of 55 HC-NIC Page 8 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT counsel   is   to   the   effect   that   either   it   is  statute which obliges to provide certain service  in which case, in certain provisions of law, it  is   a   service   provided   by   the   Bank   or   if   such  service provided by the Bank, having become part  of   all   other   employees,   in   that   case,   that  particular Union be treated as employees. He has  emphasized   that   there   are   certain   questions   of  law, which has been, time and again, decided by  the   Apex   Court.   However,   factual   matrix  eventually   would   govern   each   case.   According   to  the   learned   counsel,   there   are   certain   tests,  which have been given by the Court, which shall  need   to   be   employed   before   arriving   at   a  conclusion.   In   case   of   employees,   who   are  claiming to be employees of the Bank, they shall  need   to   clear   those   tests.   It   is   urged   by   him  further that it is not a statutory obligation of  the erstwhile Bank or of the State Bank of India  nor  is  it  part  of  the  conditions  of  service  of  other   employees   to   run   Cooperative   Store,   which  is surely not an obligation, and therefore, when  it   is   run   by   the   employer   to   give   benefit   and  Page 9 of 55 HC-NIC Page 9 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT comfort   to   the   employees,   the   canteen   is   a  liability of the employees. 

12.2 He   has   sought   to   rely   on   the   following  authorities. 

1) Union   of   India(UOI)   and   others   vs.   Ratan  Kansa Banik and others, (1997) 11 SCC 257.
2) Indian   Petrochemicals   Corpn.Ltd   &  Anr.   vs.   Shramik Sena and Ors., (1999) 6 SCC 439. 
3)  All   India   Railway   Institute   Employees'   Association   vs.   Union   of   India   through   the   Chairman, 1996(2) SCC 258.
4) Union   of   India   (Railway   Board)   &   Ors.   vs.   J.V.Subhaiah and others etc.etc.,  JT 1995(9) SC 
488.

12.3 Learned   counsel   also   urged   this   Court  that  a  proper  test,   which  needs   to  be  borne  in  mind   is   whether   or   not   hirer   had   authority   to  control   the   manner   of   execution   of   the   act   in  question. 

13. Ms.Rana, learned advocate appearing for Mr.  Page 10 of 55 HC-NIC Page 10 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Majmudar,   learned   advocate   has   adopted   the  submissions   of   learned   counsel.   She   has   urged  that there was no obligation to run the store, as  it   is   an   independent   body,   which   has   its   own  rules   and   Code   of   Conduct.   By   no   stretch   of  imagination,   its   employees   could   be   termed   as  employees   of   the   State   Bank   of   India.   It   is  admitted   that   widow   of   one   of   the   employees  working   with   the   Cooperative   Store   had   been  absorbed in the Bank, but it was extremely grave  condition,   which   had   led   to   such   humanitarian  act.  So  far  as  the  case  of  another   employee  is  concerned, namely, Atulbhai, it is her say that  by following regular procedure of recruitment, he  had been absorbed. 

14. Learned   advocate   Mr.Shukla   appearing   for  respondent   No.1   has   emphatically   urged   that   no  stay had been granted by this Court against the  said award, and therefore, the award needs to be  complied with. He urged that against the order of  the learned Single Judge, which had chosen not to  stay   the   operation   of   the   award,   Special   Leave  Page 11 of 55 HC-NIC Page 11 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Petition   (Civil)No.19040   of   2012   was   preferred  before the Apex Court, where the Court initially  had   granted   stay   and,   while   disposing   of   the  matter on 17.10.2013, the Court had continued the  operation   of   stay   till   the  disposal   of   this  petition.   He   has   urged   that   by  efflux   of   time,  all the three employees have reached to the age  of   superannuation.   Now,   there   will   not   be   any  question   of   putting   in   any   service.   It   will   be  only a matter of monetary benefit, if the Court  upholds   the   award.   It   is   further   argued   by   the  learned   counsel   that   the   entire   administrative  control   is   by   the   Bank.   No   outsider   except   the  members of the Stores are permitted. According to  him, when both Atulbhai and widow of Sureshbhai  Shah have been treated as   permanent employees,  there   is   no   reason   why   in   case   of   the   present  respondents, the same be not done. 

14.1 He has relied the following decisions:­

1) Indian   Overseas   Bank   vs.   Indian   Overseas   Bank Staff Canteen Workers's Union and another,  2000(4) SCC 245. 




                                 Page 12 of 55

HC-NIC                         Page 12 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
                /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                            JUDGMENT



           2)         Parimal   Chandra   Raha   and   others   vs.   Life  

Insurance Corporation of India and others,  1995  Supp(2) SCC 611. 

3) General   Manager,   Oil   and   Natural   Gas   Commission,   Silchar   vs.   Oil   And   Natural   Gas   Commission  Contractual  Workers  Union,  (2008)  12  SCC 275. 

4) Umrala   Gram   Panchayat   vs.   Secretary,   Municipal Employees Union, 2015(1) GLH 712.

5) State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh   and others, 2017(1) SCC 148. 

15. Before   adverting   to   the   facts   of   the   instant  case,   the   question   of   law,   which   has   been   raised  will need to be addressed by this Court. The legal  question   that   has   been   raised   shall   have   to   be  addressed   by   this   Court   whether   the   State   Bank   of  India,   who   has   taken   over   the   State   Bank   of  Saurashtra,   is   obliged   to   provide   service   to   the  employees of Consumer Cooperative Stores and is it a  service   provided   by   the   Bank   or   has   such   service  provided   by   the   Bank,   become   part   of   all   the  employees' service conditions? 





                                        Page 13 of 55

HC-NIC                                Page 13 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
                /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                            JUDGMENT



16. In   the   case   of  All   India   Railway   Institute   Employees'  Association(supra), the Association of  about   2000   employees   working   in   500   Railway  Institutes   in   various   parts   of   the   country   had  preferred   a   petition.   Their   grievance   was   that   in  the   matters   pertaining   to   the   Railway   Canteens,  where   the   petitioners   were   working,   they   were   not  treated as Railway employees. According to them, the  Railway Institute and Clubs  were set up to provide  recreational   activities   to   the   employees.     The  Railway   Board,   since   has   treated   the   Railway  Institutes   and   Clubs   as   integral   part   of   the  Railways   and   they   not   only   received   Grant­in­Aid  but   also   other   facilities   from   the   Government,   the  employees   of   the   Institutes   and   Clubs   since   were  given   free   passes   and   medical   facilities,   they  claimed that they should be treated at par with the  employees   in   statutory   Canteen   and   non­statutory  Canteen.   This   had   been   resisted   by   the   Railway  authorities   and   the   Apex   Court,   after   considering  the   respective   contentions   of   the   parties   and   the  documents  on record, held that there is a material  difference   between   Canteen   run   in   the   Railway  establishments and the Railway Institutes and Clubs.





                                        Page 14 of 55

HC-NIC                                Page 14 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
           /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                          JUDGMENT



16.1 Relevant paragraphs are reproduced as under:­   "6.   After   considering   the   respective  contentions of the parties and the documents on record, we are of  the  view   that   there   is  a  material  difference  between   the   canteens   run   in   the   Railway  establishments, and the Railway Institutes and  Clubs. In the first instance, the canteens are  invariably   a   part   of   the   establishments  concerned.   They   are   run   to   render   services  during  the   hours   of  work  since  the   services,  by their very nature are expected directly to  assist   the   staff   in   discharging   their   duties  efficiently. The lack of canteen­facilities is  ordinarily bound to hamper and interfere with,  the   normal   working   of   the   staff   and   affect  their   efficiency.   The   importance   of   the  services rendered by the canteens to the staff  in   the   day­to­day   discharge   of   their   work  therefore   needs   no   further   emphasis.   Suffice  it to say that the canteen services are today  regarded   as   a   part   and   parcel   of   every  establishment. So much so that they have been  made statutorily mandatory under the Factories  Act,   1948   in   establishments   governed   by   the  said   Act   where   more   than   250   workers   are  employed.   The   canteen   services   are   thus   no  longer looked upon as a mere welfare activity  but as an essential requirement where sizable  number of employees work. That is why even the  Railway   Administration   has,   by   its  Establishment   Manual   made   a   provision   for  canteens even where the Factories Act does not  apply,  and   has   laid   down  procedure   for   their  registration and approval and for extending to  them   almost   the   same   facilities   and   monetary  assistance   as   in   the   case   of   the   statutory  canteens. However, the same cannot be said of  the   Institutes   and   Clubs.   Although   for   them  also   the   Railway   Establishment   Manual   makes  provisions in the same Chapter XXVIII dealing  with   Staff   Welfare,   the   provisions   are   of   a  materially   different   nature   and   pattern.   In  the   first   instance,   there   is   no   provision  either  for   subsidy  or  loan   directly   from   the  Page 15 of 55 HC-NIC Page 15 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT funds   of   the   Railway   Administration.   The  Institutes/Clubs have to run on the membership  fees and fixed grants received from the Staff  Benefit   Fund.   The   Fund   consists   of   receipts  from   the   forfeited   provident   fund   and   bonus,  and of fines. The grant is made as pointed out  by the Respondents, to each Institute/Clubs at  the   rate   of   Rs.   14   per   capita   of   the   non­ gazetted   staff   employed   at   the   relevant  establishment. Out of this contribution, only  Rs.4 per capita are spent on the activities of  the Institutes and Clubs, the rest of the amount being spent on  education,relief   in   case   of   distress   and  sickness,   sports,   scouts   activities   and   for  other miscellaneous purposes. There is further  no   dispute   that   the   wages   and   allowances   of  the staff of the Institutes/Clubs are paid by  the   Institutes/Clubs   themselves   and   they   are  not   subsidised   by   the   Railway   Administration  as   in   the   case   of   the   statutory   and  nonstatutory recognised canteens. 5­A. By their very nature further the services  of the Institutes/ Clubs are availed of beyond  working   hours   only.   It   is   common   knowledge  that   not   all   members   of   the   Railway   staff  avail of them. One has to be a member to do so  by   paying   fees.   The   membership   is   also  optional.   That   is   why   most   of   the   staff  employed   in   the   Institutes/   Clubs   is   part  time.   As   has  been   stated  by  the   respondents,  out   of   about   1741   employees   engaged   in   449  Institutes and 332 Clubs nearly half are part  time   employees.   The   services   rendered   by   the  employees   are   not   of   a   uniform   nature.   They  are   engaged   for   different   services   with  different, service conditions according to the  requirement.   The   Institutes/Clubs   further   do  not   engage   in   uniform   activities,   the  activities conducted by them varying depending  upon   the   infrastructure   and   the   facilities  available at the respective places.

7. What is more importance as far as the issue  involved   in   this   petition   is   concerned,   is  that the provision of the Institutes/Clubs is  not mandatory. They are established as a part  Page 16 of 55 HC-NIC Page 16 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT of   the  welfare   measure   for   the  Railway   staff  and   the   kind   of   activities   they   conduct  depend,   among   other   things,   on   the   funds  available  to  them.  The   activities  have   to   be  tailored   to   the   budgets   since   by   their   very  nature the funds are not only limited but keep  on fluctuating. If the costs of the activities  go   beyond   the   means,   they   have   to   be  curtailed.   So   also,   while   starting   a   new  activity, it is necessary   to   take   into   account   its   financial  implications   and   the   capacity   of   the  Institute/Club   to   raise   the   necessary   funds.  The only varying component of the funds is the  membership fee which is uncertain.

8.   If   as   contended   by   the   petitioner  Association   the     workers   engaged   in   these  Institutes/Clubs are treated as  Railway   employees,   the   danger   is   that   these  welfare   activities   which   are   otherwise  encouraged   by   the   Railway   Administration   may  in course' of time shrink and cease altogether  for   want   of   funds.   This   will   not   be   in   the  interests   of   the   workers   themselves.   One  cannot lose sight of the fact that today the  emoluments   of   government   servants   including  those   of   the   Railway   employees,   may   they  belong   to   Class   IV   or   to   a   higher   category,  are substantial and inhibit fresh recruitment. The services rendered by a government agency,  therefore,   become   costly   and   uneconomical.  Compared to the services which are rendered by  the   Institutes/Clubs   and   the   benefits   which  flow   from   them,   an   increase   in   their  administrative   expenditure   which   may   result  from   granting   the   status   of   the   railway  employees   to   their   workers.   will   be  disproportionately   high   and   forbidding.   This  will also have a snow­bailing effect on other  welfare activities carried on by the Railways  and similar activities carried on by all other  organisations.   We   also   cannot   lose   sight   .of  fact   that  the   workers  engaged   in   the  welfare  activities   today   are     drawn   from   the  respective   localities   without   restrictions   of  the   qualifications   of   education,   age   etc.  Page 17 of 55 HC-NIC Page 17 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Whatever   little   scope   for   employment   is  available   to   the   local   population   at   the  respective places may 603 also   vanish   with   the   cessation   of   these  activities. After all, the number of employees  who may benefit by becoming railway employees  does   not   today   exceed   887   who   are   the   full  time employees scattered all over the country.  But, they may deprive many of their bread in  the present and in the future. For, as pointed  out by the Respondents, if the Railway Service  Rules are made applicable, many of the present  employees   will   also   have   to   face   immediate  unemployment.   This  is  of  course   yet   a  larger  related socio­economic consideration."

16.2 The Court in the end held that they are not  persuaded   to   accept   that   there   was   no  relationship   between   employer   and   employee  between   the   Railway   administration   and   the  employees   engaged   in   the   Railway   Institute   and  Clubs. 

17. In   the   case   of  Union   of   India   (Railway   Board)   and  others  vs.  J.V.   Subhaiah  and  others   etc. etc.,  AIR 1996 SC 2890, the employees were  seeking   declaration   that   they   are   not   regular  Railway   employees   in   the   Class­III   post   and,  therefore, they were entitled to be paid regular  salary   for   continuous   service   from   the   date   of  respective appointment in the Societies and also  Page 18 of 55 HC-NIC Page 18 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT school   premises   including   increment   and   payment  of arrears of service. The Central Administrative  Tribunal   allowed   the   application   and   gave   the  directions for grant of reliefs. The stores were  registered   under   the   Andra   Pradesh   Cooperative  Societies Act, 1964 and as a mandate from time to  time,   they   were   organized   by   the   Railway  administration   as   social   welfare   measure   to  inculcate cooperative spirit in the management of  the   Societies,   distribution   of   essential  commodities and lending of credit facilities etc.  to its  members.  Relevant paragraphs of the said  judgment are reproduced as under:­  "3. The admitted facts are that the respondents  were   appointed   by   the   respective   Railway   Co­ operative   Stores   registered   under   the   Andhra  Pradesh   Co­operative   Societies   Act,   1964   as  amended   from   time   to   time.   The   Co­operative  Stores   were   organised   by   the   Railway  Administration   as   social   welfare   measure   to  inculcate thrift and co­operative spirit in the  management   of   the   socieites,   distribution   of  essential   commodities   and   lending   of   credit  facilities   etc.   to   the   members   of   the  societies.   Under   the   bye­laws,   respective  societies   consist   of   serving   members   of   the  Railway   Administration   at   the   respective  places. Normally these socieities are formed at  railway junctions. They are organised under the  instructions   issued   by   the   Railway  Administration   in   the   Railway   Establishment  Manual   (non­statutory   orders).   Working   of   the  socieities   are   supervised   by   the   welfare  Page 19 of 55 HC-NIC Page 19 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT officers   appointed   by   the   Railway  Administration. It is in dispute as to whether  salaries   to   welfare   officers   are   paid   by   the  socieites   concerned   or   by   the   Railway  Administration   but   that   is   not   material   for  disposal of these appeals. It is also  not in  dispute  that  one  third  of  the members  of  the  socieities   are   nominated   by   the   Railway  Administration.

4.   Shri   Tulsi,   learned   Additional   Solicitor,  General   contended,   on   the   facts,   that   Co­ operative   Stores   registered   under   the   Co­ operative   Societies   Act,   a   State   Act   and   the  articles of association or the bye­laws of the  socieites   are   sanctioned   by   the   Registrar   of  Co­operative   Societies   (for   short,   "The  Registrar") of the concerned State appointed by  the State Government under the respective State  Acts.   The   constitution   of   the   socieities   is  regulated and registered under the State Act.  Appropriate   law,   rules   and   bye­laws   provide  that   the   General   Body   of   the   society  periodically   elects   the   members   of   the  committee which in turn elects the President or  general body itself elects the President, for a  specified   term.   The   President   and   the  committee, as the case may be, is empowered to  appoint the officers, employees and servants of  the   Stores   according   to   its   bye­laws.   The  Registrar   under   the   respective   Acts,   has  supervision and control over the working of the  societies and its employees. In case of dispute  between   the   society   and   its   members   or   the  society and its officers or employees, the same  is resolved by an arbitrator under the Act and  appeal   thereunder   is   provided   to   a   Tribunal  constituted   or   an   appellate   forum   specified.  The   jurisdiction   of   a   Civil   Court   stands  excluded   in   respect   of   the   said   disputes.  Salaries to the staff are paid by the society.  Railway   Establishment   Manual   prescribes  procedure   for   organisation   of   the   welfare  activities,   one   of   which   is   establishment   of  consumer   credit   co­operative   socieities   or  house   building   societies.   The   share   capital,  though deducted from the salary of the member­ Page 20 of 55 HC-NIC Page 20 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT employees,   is   only   by   way   of   an   amenity   to  enable   them   to   organise,   as   a   cooperative  movement,   for   self­help   and   thrift.   The  Administration   has   no   control   over   selection,  appointment   and   payment   of   salaries   to   the  staff   of   the   society.   No   qualifications   are  prescribed   in   that   behalf.   It   is   due   to  administrative   exigencies   of   the   concerned  Stores   or   the   Societies   that   appointment   or  dismissal   can   be   made   by   the  President/committee   as   per   the   procedure  prescribed   under   the   respective   Acts   or   the  Rules or bye­laws made thereunder. Thereby the  Railway   Administration   has   no   managerial   or  administrative   control   over   the   staff   of   the  Stores/Societies. The conditions of service of  the officers of the Railway Administration are  not   applicable   to   them.   If   the   Society   is  liquidated   by   the   Registrar   for   its  mismanagement   the   employees   of   the   Societies  seek the remedy only against the Societies. The  societies   have   not   been   impleaded   as  respondents. The ratio is M.M. Khan v. Union of  India, 1990 Supp SCC 191 : (AIR 1990 SC 937)  cannot   be   applied   to   the   employees   of   the  Societies/Stores.   The   rent­free   accommodation  and provision of electricity to the Stores and  medical   facilities   to   the   employees   are  extended   as   a   part   of   the   welfare   measure  without creating an obligation on the part of  the   Railway   Administration   to   threat   them   as  Railway   employees.   In   M.   M.   Khan's   case  recognised co­operative canteens were organised  as a part of the statutory duty under Section  46 of the Factories Act where employees are 100  or   above   in   number   but   below   250.   The   ratio  laid down therein is inapplicable to the facts  of   these   appeals.   Shri   K.   Madhava   Reddy,  learned   senior   counsel   and   Mrs.   Chandan  Ramamurthy, learned counsel for the respondent  contended   that   the   ratio   of   M.M.   Khan's   case  applies   on   all   fours   to   the   facts   of   these  appeals.   Co­operative   Stores/Societies   have  been organised at the instance of the Railway  Administration.   Their   work   is   controlled   and  supervised by the Welfare Officer appointed by  Page 21 of 55 HC-NIC Page 21 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT the Railway Administration and subsidy is being  paid by the Railway Administration. The society  is merely an intervening agency or veil between  the Railway Administration and the employees of  the Co­operative Stores/Societies. The Railway  Administration admittedly gives facilities like  railway passes, quarters on nominal rent, free  medical   aid   and   other   amenities   given   to   the  regular   officers   and   servants   of   the   Railway  Administration from time to time. The Railway  Board   issues   circulars   from   time   to   time   to  control, organise and supervise the working of  the   Stores.   The   Railway   Establishment   Manual  itself   is   a   complete   code   in   that   behalf.  Merely because the Railway Administration kept  its arms as an intervening agency between the  Stores and the employees, it cannot disown its  liability to treat the employees appointed by  the   Stores/Societies   (like   canteen   cases)   as  its employees. The decision of the Madras Bench  of   the   CAT   since   upheld   by   this   Court   in   an  appeal   and   review   petition   also   having   been  dismissed,   the   employees   appointed   by   the  respective Stores in Southern Railway and South  Central   Railway   form   a   class   discharging   the  same duties. Therefore, the respondents cannot  be   denied   their   Constitutional   right   to   have  equal treatment as had by the regular Railway  employees   Smt.   Chandan   Ramamurthy   strong  reliance on yet another decision of a two Judge  Bench of this Court in Parimal Chandra Raha v.  Life   Insurance   Corporation   of   India,   1995  (Supp) 2 SCC 611 : (1995 AIR SCW 2609).

xxx   xxx   xxx xxx   xxx   xxx

17. It is seen that service conditions of the  employees,   officers   and   servants   of   the  Stores/Societies   are   not   regulated   by   the  Railway   Administration.   They   are   governed   by  the   bye­laws   of   the   Societies   subject   to  control and sanction by the Registrar under the  State Act or the relevant provisions. There is  no   obligation   on   the   part   of   the   Railway  Page 22 of 55 HC-NIC Page 22 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Administration   to   provide   security   for   those  employees.   The   disciplinary   control   by   the  Society concerned is subject to other laws and  is   exclusively   domestic   in   character.   The  Railway Establishment Code is not applicable to  them.   Their   appointment   is   subject   to   bond  prescribed   by   the   Registrar.   The   arrears   of  funds   or   misappropriated   amounts   etc.   are  recoverable under the provisions of the State  Act and the Rules made thereunder. The services  of the staff are liable to termination in terms  of the State Act, Rules and bye­laws.

18.   In   other   words,   there   is   a   dual   control  over   the   staff   by   the   Society   and   the  Registrar.   In   that   behalf,   the   Railway  Administration   has   no   role   to   play.   If   the  subsidy   is   considered   to   be   a   controlling  factor   and   the   Societies/Stores   as   an  intervening agency or viel between the Railway  Administration   and   the   employees,   the   same  principle   would   equally   be   extendible   to   the  staff,   teachers,   professors   appointed   in  private educational institutions receiving aid  from   the   appropriate   State/Central   Government  to   claim   the   status   of   Government   employees.  Equally, other employees appointed in other Co­ operative   Stores/Societies   organised   by  appropriate   Government   would   also   be   entitled  to   the   same   status   as   Government   servants.  Appointment to a  post  or  an  office  under  the  State   is   regulated   under   the   statutory   rules  either by direct recruitment or appointment by  promotion from lower ladder to higher service  or appointment by transfer in accordance with  the procedure prescribed and the qualifications  speciafied. Any appointment otherwise would be  vertical transplantation into services de hours  the   rules.   Appointment   through   those  institutions   becomes   gate   way   for   back   door  entry   into   Government   service   and   would   be  contrary   to   the   prescribed   qualifications   and  other   conditions   and   recruitment   by   Public  Service Commission or appropriate agencies. As  contended,   if   the   employees   of   the   societies  like co­operative canteens and declared to be  railway   servants,   there   would   arise   dual  Page 23 of 55 HC-NIC Page 23 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT control over them by the Registrar and Railway  Administration but the same was not brought to  the   attention   of   the   Court   when   M.M.   Khan's  case (AIR 1990 SC 937) was decided.

19. It is true that the order of the two­Judge  Bench of this Court had upheld the order of the  Act, Madras Bench which had become final. With  due and great respect to our learned brethren  constituting the Bench, these features noted by  us do not appear to have been put up for their  consideration and so they did not have occasion  to   consider   the   impact   as   envisaged  hereinbefore. The Bench merely stated thus :

"...The   Tribunal   has   examined   in   detail  Chapter   XXIX   of   the   Indian   Railway  Establishment Manual and has preferred to paras  2901  to  2909.  Based  on  the provisions  of  the  Railway   Manual   and   taking   into   consideration  the actual working of the Stores, the Tribunal  has come to the conslusion that the employees  working in the Co­operative Stores are in fact  and   in   law,   the   employees   of   the   Railway  Establishment. We have been taken through the  judgment   of   the   Tribunal   and   other   relevant  material   on   record.   We   see   no   ground   to  interfere with the reasoning and the conclusion  reached by the Tribunal...".

20. In view of the above discussion and in view  of the legal setting referred to hereinbefore,  we are  of  the  considered  view that  the Bench  had not laid down any law except approving the  reasoning and conclusion reached by the Madras  Bench of the CAT. The Madras Bench had merely  referred   to   the   provisions   in   the   Manual   and  proceeded on the premise that they gave rise to  a   legal   base   to   treat   the   employees   of   the  Stores as the Railway employees. The reasoning  is   wholly   illegal   and   unsustainable   for   the  reasons stated above.

21. The principle of equality enshrined under  Article   14   of   the   Constitution,   as   contended  for   the   respondents,   does   not   apply   since   we  have  already  held that  the order of the  CAT,  Madras   Bench   is   clearly   unsustainable   in   law  and illegal which can never form basis to hold  that   the   other   employees   are   invidiously  Page 24 of 55 HC-NIC Page 24 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT discriminated   offending   Article   14.   The  employees   covered   by   the   order   of   the   Madras  Bench   may   be   dealt   with   by   the   Railway  Administration appropriately but that could not  form   foundation   to   plead   discrimination  violating Article 14 of the Constitution."

18. In   case   of  Ratan   Kansa   Banik   and  others(supra),  the   employees   working   in   the  Railway   Employees   Consumer   Cooperative   Society  whether are to be treated as Railway employees or  not was the question considered by the Apex Court  to hold that the issue is covered by the judgment  of the Apex Court in the case of  Union of India   vs.   Southern   Railway   employees   Cooperative   Society  vs.  Workers,  (1996)   2 SCC  269  and also  the   judgment   rendered   in   the   case   of  Union   of   India   vs.   Railway   Board   vs.   J.V.Subhaiah,  reported   in  JT   1995(9)   SC   488.   The   Court   held  that   the   said   decisions   have   held   the   issue  against the employees. 

19. In   the   case   of  Shramik   Sena   and   others   (supra),   the   workman   filed   the   writ   petition  before the High Court of Bombay for declaration  Page 25 of 55 HC-NIC Page 25 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT that they were regular workmen of the management  and were entitled to have the same pay­scale in  service conditions, as are applicable to regular  workmen.   According   to   Indian   Petrochemical  Corporation, they were working in the canteen in  its factory at District: Raigadh in the State of  Maharashtra.   The   Court   noted   the   fact   that   the  employer under section 46 of the Factories Act is  required to provide maintenance facilities to its  workers   and,   hence,   the   canteen   run   in   the  establishment of the management can be said to be  a statutory canteen and workmen in this canteen  become employees of the management, but only for  the   purpose   of   Factories   Act.   The   Court   was  considering whether such status of workman under  the   Factories   Act   confines   the   relationship   of  employer and employee to the requirement of the  Factories   Act   alone   or   it   extends   for   other  purposes   which   include  continuity   of   service,  absorption, seniority,pension and other benefits,  which   a   regular   employee   enjoys.   Relevant  paragraphs of the said decision are reproduced as  under:­ Page 26 of 55 HC-NIC Page 26 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT "17. ....The Factories Act does not govern the  rights   of   employees   with   reference   to  recruitment,   seniority,   promotion   retirement  benefits   etc.   These   are   governed   by   other  statutes,   rules,   contracts   or   policies.  Therefore,   the   workmen's   contention   that  employees   of   a   statutory   canteen   ipso   facto  become the employees of the establishment for  all purposes cannot be accepted.

18.   The   above   argument   of   Mr.   Singhvi   is  obviously   based   on   the   conclusion   No.   (i)  noted in Raha's case (1995 AIR SCW 2609 : AIR  1995   SC   1666   :   1995   Lab   IC   2064)   (supra)  wherein at para 25 (of Supp SCC) : (para 9 of  AIR SCW) of the judgment this Court recorded  thus:

"(i)   Whereas   under   the   provisions   of   the  Factories Act, it is statutorily obligatory on  the   employer   to   provide   and   maintain   canteen  for   the   use   of   his   employees,   the   canteen  becomes   a   part   of   the   establishment   and,  therefore,   the   workers   employed   in   such  canteen are the employees of the management." 

(Emphasis supplied).

19. Based on the above Shri Singhvi contends  that once an employee is found by this Court  to be an employee of the management because of  the Factories Act, he becomes the employee of  the management for all purposes. Per contra on  behalf of the management, it is contended that  a   reading   of   the   judgment   in   Raha's   case   in  its   totality   shows   that   what   this   Court  intended   to   lay   down   as   law   was   that   the  employees working in a statutory canteen would  become employees of the management not for all  purposes   but   for   the   limited   purpose   of   the  Factories   Act.   It   is  to   be   noted   that   in  Raha's   case   this   Court   did   not   specifically  hold that the deemed employment of the workers  is   for   all   purposes   nor   did   it   specifically  hold  that  it  is  only for  the  purpose  of  the  Factories   Act.   However,   a   reading   of   the  judgment in its entirety makes it clear that  the deemed employment is only for the purpose  of   the   Factories   Act.   This   Court   in   Raha's  Page 27 of 55 HC-NIC Page 27 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT case relied upon an earlier judgment of this  Court in M. M. R. Khan v. Union of India, 1990  Suppl SCC  191  : (AIR 1990  SC  937).  A three­ Judge   Bench   of   this   Court   considering   the  provisions of the Factories Act held that by  virtue   of   Section   46   of   the   said   Act   the  factories   covered   by   the   said   Act   are  obligated   to   provide   canteen   services   and  termed such canteens as statutory canteens. In  para 6 (of Supp SCC) (Para 5 of AIR) of the  said   judgment   while   referring   to   in   earlier  judgment   of   this   Court   in   C.A.   No.   368/78,  this Court held thus :­ "The   Act   referred   to   in   the   aforesaid   order  obviously means the Factories Act. Therefore,  what   was   confirmed   by   this   Court   was   thee  declaration   given   by   the   Calcutta   High   Court  that   the   employees   of   the   statutory   canteens  were railway employees for the purposes of the  Factories Act (Emphasis supplied).

20.   Thereafter,   in   the   said   judgment   (Khan'  case) (AIR 1990 SC 937) this Court at para 20  proceeded   to   consider   the   question   as   to  whether   staff   employed   in   the   statutory  canteen   in   the   railway   establishment,  industrial   or   non­industrial,   are   railway  employees or not.

21. And   concluded   thus   at   para   28   (of   Supp  SCC) : (Para 21 of AIR) :­ "Thus   the   relationship   of   employer   and  employee   stands   created   between   the   railway  administration and the canteen employees from  the   very   inception.   Hence,   it   cannot   be  gainsaid   that   for   the   purposes   of   the  Factories   Act   the   employees   in   the   statutory  canteens   are   the   employees   of   the   railways.  The decisions of the Calcutta and Madras High  Courts   (supra)   on   the   point,   therefore,   are  both proper and valid." (Emphasis supplied).

22. Thereafter, of course, in the said case,  this   Court   on   facts   came   to   the   conclusion,  the   employees   concerned   therein   were   in   fact  employees of the establishment.

23. If the argument of the workmen in regard  to the interpretation of Raha's case (1995 AIR  SCW   2609   :   AIR   1995   SC   1666   :   1995   Lab   IC  Page 28 of 55 HC-NIC Page 28 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT 2064)   is   to   be   accepted   then   the   same   would  run counter to the law laid down by a larger  Bench of this Court in Khan's case (AIR 1990  SC 937) (supra). On this point similar is the  view   of   another   three­Judge   Bench   of   this  Court in the case of Employers in relation to  the   Management   of   Reserve   Bank   of   India   v.  Workmen   (1996)   3   SCC   267   :   (1996   AIR   SCW  1298 : AIR 1996 SC 1241 : 1996 Lab IC 1048).  Therefore,   following   the   judgment   of   this  Court in the cases of Khan and R.B.I. (supra),  we   hold   that   the   workmen   of   a   statutory  canteen   would   be   the   workmen   of   the  establishment for the purpose of the Factories  Act only and not for all other purposes. 

24.   Having   held   that   the   workmen   in   these  appeals   are   the   respondent's   workmen   for   the  purposes   of   the   Factories   Act,   we   will   now  deal   with   the   next   question   arising   in   this  appeal   as   to   whether   from   the   material   on  record it could be held that the workmen are  in fact, the employees of the management for  all purposes.

25.   Before   answering   this   question,   we   would  like to observe that, normally, this being a  question of fact, this Court would have been  reluctant   to   examine   this   question   which   in  the ordinary course should be first decided by  a   fact­finding   tribunal.   However,   as  stated  (sic)   case   parties   have   filed   detailed  affidavits and the contents of which, in our  opinion, are sufficient for as to decide this  question   without   the   need   for   any   oral  evidence.

26.   Though   the   canteen   in   the   appellant's  establishment   is  being   managed   by   engaging   a  contractor, it is also an admitted fact that  the   canteen   has   been   in   existence   from  inception of the establishment. It is also an  admitted fact that all the employees who were  initially   employed   and   those   inducted   from  time to time in the canteen have continued to  work in the said canteen uninterruptedly. The  employer   contends   that   this   continuity   of  employment of the employees, in spite of there  being   change   of   contractors,   was   due   to   an  Page 29 of 55 HC-NIC Page 29 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT order made by the Industrial Court. Thane, on  10th of November, 1994 wherein the Industrial  Court held that these workmen are entitled to  continuity   of   service   in   the   same   canteen  irrespective of the change in the contractor.  Consequently,   a   direction   was   issued   to   the  management   herein   to   incorporate   appropriate  clauses   in   the  contract   that   may   be   entered  into with any outside contractor to ensure the  continuity of employment of these workmen. The  management,   therefore,   contends   that   the  continuous employment of these workmen is not  voluntary. A perusal of the said order of the  Industrial Court shows that these workmen had  contended   before   the   said   Court   that   the  management   was   indulging   in   an   unfair   labour  practice and in fact they were employed by the  Company.   They   specifically   contended   therein  that   they   are   entitled   to   continue   in   the  employment of the Company irrespective of the  change in the contractor. The Industrial Court  accepted their contention as against the plea  put   forth   by   the   management   herein.   The  employer   did   not   think   it   appropriate   to  challenge   this   decision   of   the   Industrial  Court   which   has   become   final.   This   clearly  suggests   that   the   management   accepted   as   a  matter   of   fact   the   respondent­workmen   are  permanent   employees   of   the   management's  canteen.   This   is   a   very   significant   fact   to  show   the   true   nature   of   respondents'  employment.   That   apart,   a   perusal   of   the  affidavits   filed   in   this   Court   and   the  contract   entered   into   between   the   management  and the contractor clearly establishes :­ 

a)   The   canteen   has   been   there   since   the  inception of the appellant's factory. 

b)   The   workmen   have   been   employed   of   long  years   and   despite   change   of   contractors   the  workers have continued to be employed in the  canteen. 

c)   The   premises,   furniture,   fixture,   fuel,  electricity, utensils etc. have been provided  for by the appellant. 

d) The wages of the canteen workers have to be  reimbursed by the appellant. 



                                 Page 30 of 55

HC-NIC                         Page 30 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
           /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                          JUDGMENT



e) The supervision and control on the canteen  is   exercised   by   the   appellant   through   its  authorised   officer,   as   can   be   seen   from   the  various   clauses   of   the   contract   between   the  appellant and the contractor. 

f) The contractor is nothing but an agent or a  manager of the appellant, who works completely  under the supervision, control and directions  of the appellant. 

g)   The   workmen   have   the   protection   of  continuous employment in the establishment. 

27. Considering these factors cumulatively, in  addition to the fact that the canteen in the  establishment of the management is a statutory  canteen,   we   are   of   the   opinion   that   in   the  instant   case,   the   respondent­workmen   are   in  fact the workmen of the appellant­management. 

28.   At   this   stage,   it   is   necessary   to   note  another   argument   of   Mr.   Andhyarujina   that   in  view of the fact that there is no abolition of  contract   labour   in   the   canteen   of   the  appellant's   establishment,   it   is   open   to  the  management   to   manage   its   canteen   through   a  contractor. Hence, he contends that by virtue  of the contract entered into by the management  with   the   contractor,   the   respondent­workmen  cannot   be   treated   as   the  employees   of   the  management. This argument would have had some  substance   if   in   reality   the   management   had  engaged   a   contractor   who   was   wholly  independent   of   the   management,   but   we   have  come   to   the   conclusion   on   facts   that   the  contractor in the present case is engaged only  for the purpose of record and for all purposes  the   workmen   in   this   case   are   in   fact   the  workmen   of  the   management.   In   the  background  of   this   finding,   the   last   argument   of   Mr.  Andhyarujina should also fail. 

29. For the reasons stated above, this appeal  of   the   management   fails   and   is   hereby  dismissed with costs.

C.A. No. 1855/1998 :

30.   In   this   appeal,   the   workmen   have  questioned   the   conditions   that   have   been  imposed   by   the   High   Court   while   directing  regularisation   of   the   workmen.   They   contend  Page 31 of 55 HC-NIC Page 31 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT that   once   the   Court   comes   to   the   conclusion  that the workmen are in fact the employees of  the management, there is no occasion to impose  these conditions. We are unable to agree with  this argument. It should be borne in mind that  the initial appointments of these workmen are  not in accordance with the rules governing the  appointments   or   the   established   policy   of  recruitment   of   the   management.   The   said  recruitments could also be in contravention of  the   various   statutory   orders   including   the  reservation policy. Further the respondent is  an   instrumentality   of   the   State   and   has   an  obligation   to  conform   to   the   requirements   of  Articles   14   and   16   of   the   Constitution.   In  spite of the same the services of the workmen  are   being   regularised   by   the   Court   not   as   a  matter of right of the workmen arising under  any   statute   but   with   a   view   to   eradicate  unfair labour practices and in equity to undo  social   injustice   and   as   a   measure   of   labour  welfare.   Therefore,   it   is   necessary   that   in  this process suitable guidelines or conditions  be   laid   down   at   the   time   of   Courts   issuing  directions   to  regularise   the   services   of  the  workmen so concerned depending upon the facts  of   each   case.   This   Court   has   consistently  followed this practice in the earlier cases of  regularisation and we do not find any reason  to   differ   from   the   same.   For   the   aforesaid  reasons, this appeal also fails and the same  is dismissed but with costs." 

20. In   the   case   of  State   Bank   of   India   and   others   vs.   State   Bank   of   India   Canteen   Employees'   Union   (Bengal   Circle)   and   others,  2000­I­LLJ   1441,   the   question   was   whether   the  employees of the canteen of some of the branches  of State Bank of India can claim to be absorbed  as the employees of the State Bank of India. The  Page 32 of 55 HC-NIC Page 32 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Apex   Court   held   that   the   hand   book   which   is  prepared   on   the   basis   of   the   agreement   between  the   Bank   and   the   representative   of   the   staff  federation   clearly   indicates   that   there   was   no  obligation   on   the   part   of   the   Bank   to   provide  maintenance   facilities   to   its   staff.   Otherwise,  the staff Federation would not have settled the  appeal   against   Justice   Moidu   Award   which   was  pending   before   the   Court,   on   the   basis   of   the  settlement. Moreover, it cannot be said that an  outsider,   who   is   not   employed   by   the   Bank,   but  who is working in the canteen run by the LIC, can  claim   that   he   is   discriminated.   Discrimination  between equals may arise where the employees are  appointed by the Bank. The Court, therefore, held  that the canteens run by the LIC in branch having  strength   of   less   than   100   employees   are   non­ recognized   canteens   as   there   are   neither  provision nor any obligation arising out of award  or contract between employer and employees of the  bank   in   running   such   canteens.   The   Court,  therefore,   agreed   with   the   decision   rendered   in  the case of  Reserve   Bank   of   India   vs.  Workmen,  Page 33 of 55 HC-NIC Page 33 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT JT  1996  (3)  SC  226, where the employees of LIC  running   the   canteen   were   not   found   entitled   to  recruitment,   as   there   was   no   relationship   of  employer   and   employee   between   the   Bank   and   the  concerned workman.  The Court held that the facts  were similar to the facts of LIC's case and even  presuming   the   privilege   of   providing   canteen  facilities to the employee, it would be difficult  to   hold   that   the   Bank   should   provide   the   said  facilities by running the canteen by itself. To  promote   canteen   facilities   by   providing   subsidy  or other facilities is altogether different from  running the canteen by the Bank itself. Running  of   a   canteen   in   a   small   branch   having   staff  strength less than a particular limited may not  be economical, but may be a waste. It, therefore,  held that employees of the canteens which are run  at   various   branches   by   the   Local   Implementation  Committees   as   per   the   welfare   scheme   framed   by  the SBI would not become employees of the Bank as  the   Bank   is   not   having   any   statutory   or  contractual   obligation   or   obligation   arising  under the award to run such canteens.  




                                 Page 34 of 55

HC-NIC                         Page 34 of 55     Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017
                /*C/SCA/15460/2011                                          JUDGMENT




21. So far as the case of  Indian Overseas  Bank  (supra)   is   concerned,   it   was   a   grievance   of   33  canteen   employees   of   the   Bank   staff.   The   vexed  question fought between worker and management was  of   status   and   relationship   of   workers   in   such  canteen   vis­a­vis   the   main   industry   or  establishment. The canteen facilities provided by  the   Oversees   Bank   at   Madras   to   the   staff  employees   and   the   department   of   Central   office  was run initially through a contractor engaged by  the management of the Bank. But, subsequently on  the   representation   of   All   India   Oversees   Bank  Employees Union, the Central Office of IOB agreed  for the floating of society in the name and style  of   "Indian   Oversees   Bank   Staff   Cooperative  Canteen". To facilitate the running of the said  canteen, the central office agreed to provide for  facilities   like   premises,   furniture,   utensils,  electricity,   (other   than   fuel),   cost   of   fuel  minimum of Rs.600/­ per month and increase that  by Rs.6000/­ per month and water supply. It also  provided   facilities   like   oven,   burners,   wash  Page 35 of 55 HC-NIC Page 35 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT basin,   gas   and   cylinders   at   subsidised   rate   to  the   members   of   the   staff.   All   promoters   were  actually   serving   members   of   the   staff   of   the  Bank. A separate account was opened in the name  of   the   Canteen,   where   the   funds   were   credited. 

The   staff   required   were   employed   by   the  promoters. 

22. With the conciliation proceedings failed and  the industrial dispute arising, the Reference was  made   and   the   Tribunal   on   the   basis   of   the  pleadings   and   the   material,   treated   all   33  employees   of   the   canteen   as   the   workmen   of  respondent   Bank.   Aggrieved   by   the   common   award,  the management challenged the same by way of writ  petitions   where   the   learned   Single   Judge   of  Madras High Court quashed the award holding that  there   was   no   employer   and   employee   relationship  between the Bank management and the canteen and  this was challenged in revision and the Tribunal  was   of   the   view   that   not   only   the   Bank   in  question   had   an   obligation   to   run   the   canteen,  but,   in   fact,   employees   were   only   running   the  Page 36 of 55 HC-NIC Page 36 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT canteen. 

23. In such background, when the question arose  before   the   Apex   Court   with   regard   to   the  relationship   of   these   persons   with   the  management, the Court held and observed thus:­ "20. The standards and nature of tests to be  applied   for   finding   out   the   existence   of  Master   and   Servant   relationship   cannot   be  confined   to   or   concretised   into   fixed  formula(s)   for   universal   application  invariably in all class or category of cases.  Though   some   common   standards   can   be   devised,  the   mere   availability   of   anyone   or   more   or  their absence in a given case cannot by itself  be   held   to   be   decisive   of   the   whole   issue,  since   it   may   depend   upon   each   case   and   the  peculiar device adopted by the employer to get  his   neeeds   fulfilled   without   rendering   him  liable.   That   being   the   position,   in   order   to  safeguard the welfare of the workmen, the veil  may   have   to   be   pierced   to   get   at   the  realities.   Therefore,   it   would   be   not   only  impossible but also not desirable to lay down  abstract   principles   or   rules   to   serve   as   a  ready reckoner for all situations and thereby  attempt to compartmentalise and peg them into  any   pigeonhole   formulas,   to   be   insisted   upon  as proof of such relationship. This would only  help   to   perpetuate   practising   unfair   labour  practices than rendering subtantial justice to  the   class   of   persons   who   are   invariably  exploited   on   account   of   their   inability   to  dictate terms relating to conditions of their  service. Neither all the tests nor guidelines  indicated   as   having   been   followed   in   the  decisions   noticed   above   should   be   invariably  insisted   upon   in   every   case,   nor   the   mere  absence   of   any   one   of   such   of   such   criteria  could be held to be decisive of the matter. A  Page 37 of 55 HC-NIC Page 37 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT cumulative   consideration   of   a   few   or   more   of  them, by themselves or in combination with any  other   relevant   aspects,   may   also   serve   to   be  the   safe   and   effective   method   to   ultimately  decide this often agitated question. Expecting  similarity   or   identity   of   facts   in   all   such  variety or class of cases involving different  type   of   establishments   and   in   dealing   with  different   employers   would   mean   seeking   for  things, which are only impossible to find.

21.   The   decision   in   Indian   Petrochmecial's  case (1999 AIR SCW 2740 : AIR 1999 SC 2577 : 

1999   Lab   IC   3078)   (supra)   does   not,   in   our  view,   lay   down   any   different   criteria   than  those   declared   in   the   other   decisions   for  adjudging   the   issue,   except   that   it   had   also  considered   specifically   the   further   question  as   to   the   effect   of   a   declaration,   that   the  workers   of   a   particular   canteen,   statutorily  obligated   to   be   run   render   no   more   than   to  deem   them   to   be   workers   for   the   limited  purpose of the Factories Act and not for all  purposes. In the case before us, the claim is  not   that   there   was   any   such   statutory  obligation   and   the   entire   consideration  proceeded   only   on   the   footing   that   it   is   a  non­statutory   recognised   canteen   falling  within   the   second   of   the   three   categories  envisaged   in   the   earlier   decisions   and   the  Tribunal as well as the Division Bench of the  High Court endeavoured to find out whether the  obligation to run was explicit or implicit on  the facts proved in this case.

22.   The   factual   findings   recorded   by   the  Tribunal   and   the   Division   Bench   as   also   the  materials   relied   upon   therefor,   have   been  already   set   out   in   detail,   supra   and   it   is  unnecessary to refer to them in greater detail  once   over   again.   The   canteen   in   question   was  being   run   from   1­1­73   and   even   before  that,indisputably,   the   Bank   itself   had  arranged   for   running   of   the   same   through   a  contractor   and   similar   arrangement   to   run  through   a   contractor   was   once   again   made   by  Page 38 of 55 HC-NIC Page 38 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT the   Bank   on   its   closure   on   26­4­90,   though  after   a   period   of   some   break   from   21­10­92.  Besides   this,   the   nature   and   extent   of  assistance,   financial   and   otherwise   in   kind,  provided which have been enumerated in detail,  would go to establish inevitably that the Bank  has   unmistakably   and   for   reasons   obvious  always   undertaken   the   obligaiton   to   provide  the canteen services, though there may not be  any   statutory   obligation   and   it   will   be   too  late to contend that the provision of canteen  had   not   become   a   part   of   the   service  conditions   of   the   employees.   The   materials  placed   on   record   also   highlight   the   position  that the Bank was always conscious of the fact  that   the   provision   and   availing   of   canteen  services   by   the   staff   are   not   only   essential  but   would   help   to   contribute   for   the  efficiency of service by the employees of the  Bank. That it was restricted to the employees  only,   that   the   subsidy   rate   per   employee   was  being also provided, and the working hours and  days of the canteen located in the very Bank  buildings were strictly those of the Bank and  the further fact that no part of the capital  required   to   run   the   same   was   contributed   by  anybody   else,   either   the   Promoters   or   the  staff   using   the   canteen   are   factors   which  strengthen   the   claim   of   the   workers.   It   was  also on evidence that the canteen workers were  enlisted   under   a   welfare   fund   scheme   of   the  Bank   besides   making   them   eligible   for  periodical medical check up by the doctors of  the Bank and admitting them to the benefits of  the   Provident   Fund   Scheme.   The   cumulative  effect of all such and other facts noticed and  considered in detail provided sufficient basis  for recording its findings by the Tribunal as  well as the Division Bench of the High Court  ultimately   to   sustain   the   claim   of   the  workers, in this case." 

24. In the case of Employers in relation to the   Page 39 of 55 HC-NIC Page 39 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Management   of   Reserve   Bank   of   India   v.   Their   Workmen  ,  AIR   1996   SC   1241,   the   RBI   had   been  providing canteen facilities to its class­III and  Class­IV   employees,   which   were   run   by  Implementation Committee or Cooperative Societies  or Contractor, in fact, it was making grants by  way of subsidy at 95% of the cost incurred by the  canteen   for   payment   of   salary,   PF   contribution  etc.   by   providing   fuel,   water,   furniture   and  fixtures. The Court held thus:

"19. We shall now take up the case of canteens  run by the Co­operative Societies. Apart from  subsidy,   and   other   matters   provided   free   of  charge   like   water,   electricity,   premises,  furniture   etc.,   the   Tribunal   has   adverted   to  the fact that the licence renewal charges paid  by the committee are reimbursed by the Bank.  Neither the strength of the workmen employed,  nor the wages can be revised without the prior  sanction   of   the   Bank   and   so   these   canteens,  are   non­statutory   recognised   canteens,   and  there is direct control exercised by the Bank  in   the   form   of   nominating   the   representative  of   the   Bank.   Here   again   non   of   the   peculiar  aspects adverted to by this Court in M. M. R.  Khan's   case   (AIR   1990   SC   937)   (supra)  regarding   the   non­statutory   recognised  canteens are present. The mere fact the Bank  nominates its representative to the Committee  or reimburses the licence renewal charges will  not in any way provide any direct control. 
20. We will now take up the matter regarding  the   non­statutory   non­recognised   canteens.   In  dealing   with   this   matter,   the   Tribunal   has  referred   to   the   various   aspects   stressed   in  paragraph 38 (of Supp SCC) : (Para 30 of AIR)  Page 40 of 55 HC-NIC Page 40 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT of the judgment in M. M. R. Khan's case (1990  Supp SCC 191) : (AIR 1990 SC 937) (supra) that  the workmen therein are not railway servants.  The   Tribunal   had   adverted   to   the   agreement  executed   between   the   Bank   and   the   contractor  which,   according   to   it,   will   show   that   the  distinguishing features mentioned in M. M. R.  Khan's   case   (supra)   are   not   present   in   this  case.   It   may   be   so.   That   leads   us   to   no  positive   conclusion   regarding   the   matter   at  issue.   As   per   the   agreement   the   Bank   has  detailed   the   subsidy   and   other   facilities  afforded by it to run the canteen and has also  stipulated   certain   conditions   necessary   for  conducting the canteen in a good, hygenic and  efficient   manner   like   insistence   of   the  quality of food, supply of food, engagement of  experienced   persons   etc.   Such   conduct   cannot  in any manner point out any obligation in the  Bank   to   provide   "canteen"   as   wrongly   assumed  by   the   Tribunal.   Since   the   distinguishing  feature   mentioned   in   M.   M.   R.   Khan's   case  (supra)   are   not   present   in   this   case,   the  Tribunal by a negative process was inclined to  hold   that   though   the   canteens   may   be   non­ statutory   and   non­statutory   recognised   ones  and   so   they   will   be   entitled   to   get   all   the  benefits like the recognised canteens. This is  a wrong approach to the issue. We have already  held that non­statutory recognised canteens in  the instant case are not similar to the non­ statutory recognised canteens considered in M.  M. R. Khan's case (supra). If the workers in  the   non­statutory   recognised   canteens  themselves cannot be considered to be workmen  under the Bank, by the same token, the workers  employed by the contractors, even if they are  considered   to   be   non­statutory   recognised  canteens as held by the Tribunal, will not be  entitled   to   get   any   benefit.   It   is   only  holding   that   the   canteens   run   by   contractors  are   similar   to   non­statutory   recognised  canteens,   the   Tribunal   has   given   the   same  benefit   as   was   given   to   the   workmen   in   the  recognised canteens. It should also be noticed  that the various factors noticed in paragraph  Page 41 of 55 HC-NIC Page 41 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT 38   (of   Supp   SCC)   :   (Para   30   of   AIR)   of   the  judgment   in   M.   M.   R.   Khan's   case   (1990   Supp  SCC   191   :   AIR   1990   SC   937)   (supra)   were  adverted   to   by   this   Court   to   deny   the   plea  that   the   canteen   workers   "are   not   railway  servants"   in   the   context   of   the   various  provisions   contained   in   the   Railway  Establishment Manual and other documents. The  said decision rested on its own facts.

21.   We,   therefore,   hold   that   the   assumption  made   by   the   Tribunal   that   the   instant   case  clearly   falls   within   the   ratio   laid   down   by  this Court in M. M. R. Khan's case (AIR 1990  SC   937)   (supra),   is   totally   unjustified   and  incorrect. On the facts of this case, in the  absence   of   any   statutory   or   other   legal  obligation and in the absence of any right in  the Bank to supervise and control the work or  the   details   thereof   in   any   manner   regarding  the   canteen   workers   employed   in   the   three  types of canteens, it cannot be said that the  relationship   of   master   and   servant   existed  between   the   Bank   and   the   various   persons  employed   in   three   types   of   canteens,   166  persons mentioned in the list attached to the  reference are not workmen of the Reserve Bank  of   India   and   that   they   are   not   comparable  employees   employed   in   the   officers   lounge.  Therefore,   the   demand   for   regularisation   is  unsustainable and they are not entitled to any  relief. We hold that the award passed by the  Tribunal   is   factually   and   legally  unsustainable.

22.   Before   concluding   the   case,   we   should  advert to the decision of this Court reported  in   Parimal   Chandra   Raha   v.   Life   Insurance  Corporation of India, (1995 (3) JT (SC) 288 : 

1995   AIR   SCW   2609)   (supra)   brought   to   our  notice.   Both   sides   extensively   referred   to  this   judgment   to   reinforce   their   plea.   After  adverting to the earlier decisions, this Court  has   sum­marised   the   law   in   paragraph   27   (of  JT) : (Para 9 of AIR) of the judgment thus :­ "What   emerges   from   the   statute   law   and   the  judicial decisions is as follows :­
(i)   Where,   as   under   the   provisions   of  Page 42 of 55 HC-NIC Page 42 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT theFactories Act. it is statutorily obligatory  on   the   employer   to   provide   and   maintain  canteen   for   the   use   of   his   employees,   the  canteen   becomes   a   part   of   the   establishment  and,   therefore,   the   workers   employed   in   such  canteen are the employees of the management.
(ii)   Where,   although   it   is   not   statutorily  obligatory   to   provide   a   canteen,   it   is  otherwise   an   obligation   on   the   employer   to  provide a canteen, the canteen becomes a part  of   the   establishment   and   the   workers   working  in   the   canteen,   the   employees   of   the  management.   The   obligation   to   provide   a  canteen   has   to   be   distinguished   from   the  obligation   to   provide   facilities   to   run  canteen.   The   canteen   run   pursuant   to   the  latter obligation, does not become a part of  the establishment.
(iii) The obligation to provide canteen may be  explicit or implicit. Where the obligation is  not   explicitly   accepted   by   or   cast   upon   the  employer   either   by   an   agreement   or   an   award  etc.,   it   may   be   inferred   from   the  circumstances,   and   the   provision   of   the  canteen may be held to have become a part of  the   service   conditions   of   the   employees. 

Whether the provision for canteen services has  become   a   part   of   the   service   conditions   or  not, is a question of fact to be determined on  the facts and circumstances in each case.

Where   to   provide   canteen   services   has  become a part of the service conditions of the  employees, the canteen becomes a part of the  establishment and the workers in such canteen  become the employees of the management.

(iv)   Whether   a   particular   facility   or  service   has   become   implicitly   a   part   of   the  service   conditions   of   the   employees   or   not,  will   depend,   among   others,   on   the   nature   of  the   service/facility,   the   contribution   the  service in question makes to the efficiency of  the   employees   and   the   establishment,   whether  the service is available as a matter of right  to   all   the   employees   in   their   capacity   as  employees   and   nothing   more,   the   number   of  employees   employed   in   the   establishment   and  Page 43 of 55 HC-NIC Page 43 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT the   number   of   employees   who   avail   of   the  service,   the   length   of   time   for   which   the  service   has   been   continuously   available,   the  hours during which it is available, the nature  and   character   of   management,   the   interest  taken   by   the   employer   in   providing,  maintaining,   supervising   and   controlling   the  service,   the   contribution   made   by   the  management   in   the   form   of   infrastructure   and  funds for making the service available etc. Counsel   for   the   appellant   Mrs.   Salve  submitted   that   propositions   Nos.   3   and   4  contained in paragraph 27 of the judgment are  very   wide   and   require   reconsideration   and  appropriate   modification,   whereas   Mr.  Tarkunde,   Counsel   for   respondents   submitted  that   propositions   Nos.   3   and   4   lay   down   the  law correctly. It is unnecessary, on the facts  of   this   case,   to   consider   to   what   extent  propositions   Nos.   3   and   4   require   to   be  clarified or modified, since in this case the  Tribunal has proceeded only on the basis that  the   instant   case   clearly   falls   within   the  ratio   laid   down   by   this   Court   in   M.   M.   R.  Khan's case (AIR 1990 SC 937) (supra), which  we have held is a totally wrong perspective.  In these circumstances, we are not called upon  to   consider   the   rival   pleas   regarding   the  scope and ambit of propositions Nos. 3 and 4  contained in para 27 (of JT) : (Para 9 of AIR)  of the judgment in Parimal Chandra Raha's case  (1995   (3)   JT   (SC)   288   :   1995   AIR   SCW   2609)  (supra)."

25. In the case of  Balwant Rai Saluja and Anr.  

v. Air India Ltd. and Ors., AIR 2015 SC 375, the  Supreme   Court   has   applied   test   of     NALCO     by  holding   that   the   proper   test   is   whether   or   not  the hirer had authority to control the manner of  Page 44 of 55 HC-NIC Page 44 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT execution of the act in question. 

26. Some tests are laid down for testing as to  whether the management controls execution of the  act in question. The following tests are applied. 

Relevant paragraphs are reproduced hereunder:­ "59.   The   NALCO   case   (supra)   further   made  reference to the case of Workmen of Nilgiri Co­ op. Mkt. Society Ltd. v. State of T.N. (2004) 3  SCC   514   :   (AIR   2004   SC   1639   :   2004   AIR   SCW 

973),   wherein   this   Court   had   observed   as  follows:

"37.   The   control   test   and   the   organization  test, therefore, are not the only factors which  can   be   said   to   be   decisive.   With   a   view   to  elicit   the   answer,   the   Court   is   required   to  consider   several   factors   which   would   have   a  bearing   on   the   result:   (a)   who   is   the  appointing authority; (b) who is the paymaster; 
(c) who can dismiss; (d) how long alternative  service   lasts;   (e)   the   extent   of   control   and  supervision;   (f)   the   nature   of   the   job   e.g.  whether it is professional or skilled work; (g)  nature   of   establishment;   (h)   the   right   to  reject.
38. With a view to find out reasonable solution  in a problematic case of this nature, what is  needed   is   an   integrated   approach   meaning  thereby   integration   of   the   relevant   tests  wherefor it may be necessary to examine as to  whether   the   workman   concerned   was   fully  integrated into the employer's concern meaning  thereby   independent   of   the   concern   although  attached therewith to some extent."

60. It was concluded by this Court in the NALCO  case (2014 AIR SCW 3448) (supra) that there may  have   been   some   element   of   control   with   NALCO  because   its   officials   were   nominated   to   the  Managing   Committee   of   the   said   schools.  However,   it   was   observed   that   the   above­said  Page 45 of 55 HC-NIC Page 45 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT fact  was only  to  ensure that  the schools  run  smoothly   and   properly.   In   this   regard,   the  Court observed as follows:

"30. ... However, this kind of "remote control" 

would   not   make   NALCO   the   employer   of   these  workers.   This   only   shows   that   since   NALCO   is  shouldering and meeting financial deficits, it  wants to ensure that the money is spent for the  rightful purposes."

61. Thus, it can be concluded that the relevant  factors   to   be   taken   into   consideration   to  establish   an   employer­employee   relationship  would include, inter alia, (i) who appoints the  workers; (ii) who pays the salary/remuneration; 

(iii)   who   has   the   authority   to   dismiss;   (iv)  who can take  disciplinary action; (v) whether  there is continuity of service; and (vi) extent  of control and supervision, i.e. whether there  exists   complete   control   and   supervision.   As  regards, extent of control and supervision, we  have already taken note of the observations in  Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills case (2010 AIR SCW  7312)   (supra),   the   International   Airport  Authority   of   India   case   (AIR   2009   SC   3063   : 

2009   AIR   SCW   4926)(supra)   and   the   NALCO   case  (supra)."

27. The law, thus, on the subject is very clear  as   discussed   above.   The   proper   test   for  determining   the   vexed   issues,   which   have   come  before this Court requires an integrated approach  where some of the basic questions to be addressed  are of the status and relationship of workers and  of   the   management   in   such   organisation   and   the  extent of control and supervision of management,  nature of establishment and nature of work etc.  Page 46 of 55 HC-NIC Page 46 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT

28. This Court notices that respondent No.2 runs  the   consumer   store   in   the   name   and   style   of  "Saurashtra   Cooperative   Societies",   which   is   a  registered   society   registered   under   the   Gujarat  Cooperative Societies Act. It provides essential  commodities   at   reasonable   prices   to   all   its  members and the members are the employees of the  erstwhile   State   Bank   of   Saurashtra   and   now   the  State  Bank   of  India.  It  is  also  not  in  dispute  that   all   employees,   who   are   respondents   herein,  had   been   taken   up   as   class­IV   and   Class­III  employees, two of them as weighman and one as a  salesman. The year of joining the said canteen is  also 1978, 1984 and 1990 respectively of each of  the   respondents.     The   bank   runs   welfare  activities for its employees and the said store  has been started for welfare and benefits of the  bank employees.

29. The   Managing   Director   of   the   Bank   is  Chairman   of   respondent   No.2­Consumer   Store   and  the   Manager   or   the   Accountant   of   the   store   are  Page 47 of 55 HC-NIC Page 47 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT appointed   by   the   petitioner­Bank.   The   land,  building,   fixtures   and   furniture   as   well   as  stationary   are   provided   by   the   Bank.   All   these  employees   of   the   store   have   been   appointed   on  compassionate basis.

30. The question that would arise in the instant  case   is   whether   there   exist   relationship   of  master   and   servant   between   the   respondent   and  Bank and whether it was compulsory for the Bank  employees to become members of the consumer store  and whether there was any statutory obligation on  the   part   of   the   Bank   to   run   the   cooperative  society, which is a consumer store for providing  essential commodities at a reasonable rate. 

31. If   one   applies   the   tests   laid   down   by   the  judgment   of  National   Aluminium   Co.Ltd.   vs.   Ananta  Kishore  Rout,  (2014)  6  SCC   756  and also  the judgment rendered in the case of Balwant Rai   Saluja   and   another   vs.   Air   India   Limited   and   others,  (2014)   9   SCC   407,   in   absence   of   any  statutory   obligation   of   the   Bank   to   run  Page 48 of 55 HC-NIC Page 48 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT cooperative   societies,   it   can   be   unhesitatingly  held   that   none   of   the   tests   laid   down   in   the  judgment   of  National   Aluminium   Co.Ltd.  (supra)  and  Balwant   Rai  Saluja(supra) gets satisfied in  case of any of these respondents.

32. The   first   and   foremost   is   the   issue   of  appointment. The respondents when were taken up,  their   appointments   were   made   by   the   Executive  Committee of Store. Even if the Store Manager is  one of the members and a regular employee of the  bank   that  ipso   facto  would   not   make   him  authorised   to   employ   anyone   as   an   employee   of  Bank.   By   very   constitution   of   the   said  society/store   member   could   be   only   the   employee  of the Bank. No procedure is followed of public  employment,   those   respondents   were   taken   up   on  random basis. Neither wireman nor salesmen needed  to   clear   any   test.   Undisputedly,   their  appointment had been made under the signature of  the   President   of   Consumer   Cooperative   Societies  and,   on   monthly   basis,   their   salary   had   been  given   by   the   Cooperative   Society   which   is   a  separate   entity   in   the   eyes   of   law   for   having  Page 49 of 55 HC-NIC Page 49 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT been   registered   under   the   Gujarat   Cooperative  Societies Act, 1961

33. The   Cooperative   store   was   registered   on  29.7.1965 under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies  Act.   A   separate   body   maintains   and  also  administers   the   said   store.   Even   if   bank  employees form part of such a body, that does not  become synonym of the authorised panel as body of  Bank for recruitment of employees, nor would be  membership of employees of the Bank in the store  bring   the   same   under   the   canteen   of   Bank  directly.   Again,   the   profits   of   the   society   as  per   the   details   are   to   be   distributed   to   the  share holders in accordance with the bye­laws. A  Managing   Committee   to   be   constituted   with   not  less   than   six   and   not   more   than   nine   share  holders   and   the   said   Managing   Committee   has  absolute rights to manage the society as per the  bye­laws. Any person serving the branch of Bank  and who purchases minimum one share and abide by  bye­laws, becomes the member of the Society.

34. Thus,  the   staff   of   the   petitioner   Bank  has  Page 50 of 55 HC-NIC Page 50 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT established   the   said   cooperative   store   and  appointment   made   of   the   respondents   by   the  Managing Committee would be governed by the bye­  laws of the said Cooperative Society. 

35. This Society being a separate entity as per  the   law,   the   Tribunal   erred   seriously   in  disregarding well laid down plethora of decisions  while   holding   respondents   as   workmen   of  petitioner   Bank.   Absorption   of   two   employees   of  the store in the Bank also cannot be held as a  precedent as the reasons for the same have been  well explained by the petitioner.

36. Providing   facilities   by   the   petitioner­Bank  for   running   the   canteen   in   terms   of   availing  land, building fixtures and furnitures   as well  as stationary etc. would not mean that the tests  provided   in   the   case   of  National   Aluminium   Co.Ltd.  (supra)   and  Balwant   Rai   Saluja(supra)  would get satisfied nor would the ratio laid down  in   the   decision   rendered   in   the   case   of  State   Bank of India and others vs. State Bank of India   Canteen   Employees'   Union   (Bengal   Circle)   and   Page 51 of 55 HC-NIC Page 51 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT others(supra)would apply to the facts of instant  case. The case of the petitioner­Bank is squarely  covered by the decisions rendered in the case of  Union   of   India   vs.   Southern   Railway   Employees'   Coop.   Stores   Workers'   Union  (supra)   and   the  decision rendered in J.V.Subhaiah (supra) so also  of  Ratan   Kansa   Banik's  case   (supra).   The   mere  fact that to encourage the store of the employees  to run smoothly if certain support is lent which  facilitates smooth functioning, that in no manner  would lead to conclusion that the Bank had either  legal   or   statutory   obligation   to   run   the  cooperative   store   nor   would   that   establish   any  control of Bank on such store. 

37. At this stage, reference needs to be made of  the   fact   that   the   judgment   and   order   passed   by  the   Industrial   Tribunal   is   essentially   based   on  the   decision   rendered   in   the   case   of  Indian   Overseas   Bank  (supra).   In   the   opinion   of   this  Court, the Tribunal  has allowed the reference in  favour   of   the   respondent   employee   disregarding  the   strong   factual   matrix   existing   in   this  matter.   As is quite apparent from the decision  Page 52 of 55 HC-NIC Page 52 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT of the Indian Oversees Bank(supra), the promoters  were appointed from the permanent employees for a  period   of   one   year.   Another   committee   was  nominated at the end of one year by the Bank and  promoters   were   looking   after   the  day   to   day  supervision   of   the   canteen.   The   management   had  taken   upon   itself   the   entire   responsibility   of  providing   canteen   facilities.   It   was   also  provided   with   basic   facilities   like   building,  utensils, furniture etc. supply of food stuff at  subsidised rates. The Bank also provided subsidy  for meeting the salary of canteen facilities and  were   incurring   the   cost   of   electricity,   water  supply etc. which had been given in the canteen. 

In essence, it was run by the funds of the Bank. 

The   canteen   was   exclusively   used   by   the   Bank  staff   and   the   management   committee   did   not  contribute anything for running the canteen. The  recruitment of the staff also was by the staff of  the   Bank.   The   railway   establishment   manual   and  other material had allowed the Court to conclude  that   not   only   there   was   a   complete   supervision  and   control   of   the   Bank   on   the   working   of   the  Page 53 of 55 HC-NIC Page 53 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT canteen,   there   was   a   statutory   and   legal  obligation to run the same.

38. This   Court   is   conscious   that   ordinarily   no  interference   is   desirable   in   the   decision   of  Tribunal   except   for   correcting   errors   of  jurisdiction committed by Tribunals or the orders  are   without   jurisdiction   or   in   excess   of   it   or  acts illegally as held by the Constitution Bench  in   case   of  Syed   Yakoob   vs.   K.S.   Radhakrishnan   and   others,  AIR   1964   SC   477.   Considering   the  material   on   record   and   in   wake   of   the   well  established ratio on the subject, unhesitatingly,  it   can   be   held   that   the   Tribunal   failed  materially in applying the law on the subject to  the   facts   on   hands.   This   serious   evasion   would  warrant interference at the hands of this Court  and   issuance   of   writ   of   certiorari     would   be  necessary in these set of circumstances.  

39. In absence of any of these elements existing  in   the   present   case,   in   the   opinion   of   this  Court, the Tribunal erred in granting the status  of workman of Bank to the staff of the Employees  Page 54 of 55 HC-NIC Page 54 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017 /*C/SCA/15460/2011 JUDGMENT Consumer Cooperative Stores Ltd. The award dated  30.6.2010 passed in Reference I.T.C(New) NO.5 of  2009   by   the   Tribunal   is   quashed   and   set   aside. 

Petition is allowed in above terms. Rule is made  absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. 

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) SUDHIR Page 55 of 55 HC-NIC Page 55 of 55 Created On Wed Aug 16 04:32:07 IST 2017