Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: gref in The Union Of India & 3 Ors vs Mohammed Ansari on 2 August, 2013Matching Fragments
whether a member of the GREF is a member of Armed Forces? This question is no longer res integra inasmuch as a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in R. Viswan and others Vs. Union of India and others (AIR 1983 SC 658), had the occasion to deal with the question of applicability of the Army Act, 1950, to the members of the GREF.
10. In R. Viswan's case (supra), wherein the application of some of the provisions of the Army Act, 1950, and the Rules, framed thereunder, to the member of the GREF, by issuance of notifications by the Government of India, was the main subject of challenge, it was contended by R. Viswan, a member of the GREF, that in the light of the provisions of Article 33 of the Constitution of India, the GREF is neither an Armed Force nor a Force charged with the maintenance of public order and, hence, the notifications, issued for applying certain provisions of the Army Act, 1950, and Chapter IV of the Army Rules, 1954, to the GREF, were ultra vires.
"10. It is undoubtedly true that as stated by the Minister of Defence, GREF is a civilian construction force and the members of GREF are civilian employees under the administrative control of the Border Roads Development Board and that the engineer officers amongst them constitute what may be designed as "Central Civil Services, within GREF, but that does not mean that they cannot be at the same time form an integral part of the WP(C) 4074 of 2012 Page 8 Armed Forces. The fact that they are described as civilian employees and they have their own special rules of recruitment and are governed by the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 is not determinative of the question whether they are members of the Armed Forces. The question whether the members of GREF can be said to be members of the Armed Forces for the purpose of attracting the applicability of Article 33 must depend essentially on the character of GREF, its organisational set up, its functions, the role it is called upon to play in relation to the Armed Forces and the depth and intimacy of its connection and the extent of its integration with the Armed Forces and if judged by this criterion, they are found to be members of the Armed Forces, the mere fact that they are non- combatant civilians governed by the Central Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules 1965, cannot make any difference. (AIR 1983 SC 658 to 673, 674). Applying the aforesaid criteria in determining the status of members of GREF, the Court held:
"It is abundantly clear from those facts and circumstances that GREF is an integral part of the Armed Forces and the members of GREF can legitimately be said to be members of the Armed Forces within the meaning of Article 33."
(Emphasis is added)
13. From the above observations, made in R. Viswan (supra), it becomes clear that GREF is a civilian construction force and the members of the GREF are civil employees under the administrative control of the Border Roads Development Board. At the same time, however, GREF is an integral part of the Armed Forces and the members of GREF can legally be said to be members of the Armed Forces within the meaning of Article 33 and, hence, the provisions of WP(C) 4074 of 2012 Page 9 the Army Act, 1950, are, for the purpose of discipline, extended, though to a limited extent, to the members of the GREF. The fact that the members of the GREF are described as civil employees and they have their own special rules of recruitment and are governed by the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, is not determinative of the question whether they are members of the Armed Forces or not. The answer to the question, whether the members of the GREF can, for the purpose of attracting applicability of Article 33, be said to be members of the Armed Forces, must depend essentially on the character of the GREF, its organisational set up, its functions and the role it is called upon to play in relation to the Armed Forces and the depth and intimacy of its connection and the extent of its integration with the Armed Forces. The mere fact that the members of GREF are non-combatant civilians and they are governed by the Central Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules 1965, cannot make any difference.
29. Situated thus, it becomes abundantly clear that not only a member of the Armed Forces, but even a member of the GREF, who is tried by a Court Martial, has the right to prefer appeal by taking recourse to Section 15 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. However, all the provisions of the Army Act, 1950, having not been made applicable to the members of the GREF, neither all punishments, as embodied under Section 71 of the Army Act, 1950, can be imposed on a member of the GREF, nor can he, in all eventualities, invoke Section 15 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. In this regard, it is noteworthy that by virtue of SRO 329, dated 03.09.1960, issued by the Government of India, in exercise of its power conferred by sub-Section (1) of Section 4 of the Army Act, 1950, the provisions of the Army Act WP(C) 4074 of 2012 Page 19 and the Rules, framed thereunder, have been applied to the members of the GREF. While so applying the provisions of the Army Act, 1950, to the members of the GREF, the application of the provisions of the Army Act and the Rules, framed thereunder, has been kept minimal for the purpose of maintaining discipline. Thus, while the provisions of Section 21 of the Army Act, 1950, has been made applicable to the members of the GREF, the provisions of Section 71 of the Army Act, 1950, have not been made applicable in toto inasmuch as the provisions, embodied in clauses (d), (e), (f), (g) and (k) of Section 71, which prescribes the penalties of cashiering, dismissal from the service, reduction in rank, forfeiture of seniority of rank and forfeiture of all arrears of pay and allowances, respectively, have not been made applicable. As a corollary thereto, the provisions of the Central Civil Services (Control, Classification and Appeals) Rules, 1965, would be applicable to those matters, which have been left exempted by the Government of India's Notification aforementioned. Obviously, therefore, the GREF personnel, if aggrieved by the imposition of any of the penalties prescribed by clauses (a), (b), (c), (h), (i), (j) and (l) of Section 71 of the Army Act, 1950, would have the right to prefer appeal under Section 50 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. For remaining service related matters, a member of the GREF would be covered by the provisions of the Central Civil Services (Control, WP(C) 4074 of 2012 Page 20 Classification and Appeals) Rules, 1965, of course, all the provisions of the Constitution of India.