Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
HINDUSTAN MACHINE TOOLS & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
M.RANGAREDDY & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/09/2000
BENCH:
S.Rajendra Babu, D.P.Mohapatra
JUDGMENT:
L.....I.........T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J
D.P.Mohapatra. J.
The Hindustan Machines Tools Ltd. (hereinafter
referred to as ’HMT Ltd.’) represented by its
Chairman-cum-Managing Director at Bangalore and the Ceneral
Manager and the Joint General Manager (Personnel Incharge)
at Bali Nagar, Hyderabad have filed these appeals by special
leave challenging the judgment dated 9th Nov. 1995 of the
Single Judge of the A.P. High Court in Writ Petition No.
3425 of 1995 which was confirmed in appeal by a Division
Bench of that Court by its Order dated 28th Dec. 1995 in
Writ Appeal No. 1710 of 1995.
HMT Ltd. is a Public Sector Undertaking of the Govt.
of India which as described by the appellants, has grown
into a multi-unit, multi-product, multi-technology Company
having four business groups and 20 manufacturing units
spread over ten different States in the country. The
Company engages casual workers on daily rate basis depending
upon the need and exigencies of work. Forty two such casual
workers engaged in the unit of the Company at Hyderabad
filed the Writ Petition with a prayer to issue a Writ or
Order or Direction in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus
directing the respondents to regularise their services in
their respective posts from the date of the initial
appointment with all consequential benefits forthwith. The
appellants were arrayed as respondents in the Writ Petition.
The writ petitioners alleged inter alia that they have
been working as helpers and skilled workers in different
departments of the Company for long periods of 3 to 10 years
continuously. Their engagement has been treated as casual
labour on daily wage basis. Some of them have undergone
training course (I.T.I.) as apprentice under the Company.
On successful completion of the said training the incumbents
were given temporary appointments, which continued till the
date of filing of the writ petition. The writ petitioners
further alleged that though they had been discharging duties
similar to those of regular employees of the Company, they
were denied the benefit of regularisation of service and
other service benefits on that basis. Under such compelling
circumstances the casual workers filed the writ petition
seeking the reliefs noted above. During pendency of the
writ petition, considering the application filed by the writ
petitioners seeking interim relief, the High Court passed
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
the order for maintenance of status quo as on the date of
the order to ensure continuance of the writ petitioners in
service.
The respondents in the writ petition refuted the
allegations made therein. The gist of the case pleaded by
them was that it is necessary for the Company to engage
casual workers to cope with the situation arising from
absence of regular workers. Engagement of casual workers in
such circumstances becomes necessary for continuity of the
production line in the units. Engagement of such workers
depends on the necessity on a particular day and no
assurance of engagement can be given to any casual worker
for continuous engagement over a period. The further case
pleaded by the company was that recruitment of casual
workers is not according to rules for recruitment when is
followed in the case of regular workmen. Therefore, no
comparison can be made between the two groups, namely, the
casual workers and the regular workmen of the Company. The
learned single Judge of the High Court considered the
materials produced by the parties in support of their
respective cases and examined the matter in the light of the
decisions of this Court in the case of State of Haryana &
Ors. Vs. Piara Singh & Ors. 1992(4) SCC 118 = AIR 1992
Supreme Court 2130 and in the case of Niadar & Anr. Vs.
Delhi Administration and Anr. 1992(4) SCC 112 and other
decisions of the High Court and disposed of the writ
petition by passing the following Order :
"I) That the respondent Company is directed to evolve
a scheme of absorbing the petitioners herein who have
completed more than 5 years of continuous service with their
establishment within a period of 6 months from the date of
receipt of this order.
ii) That the preference may be given to the employees
(some of the petitioners herein), who have completed ITI
training and the Apprenticeship with the respondents
Company; AND
iii) That respondents are directed to absorb the
petitioners herein, who also completed 5 years of continuous
service with their establishment. The appointments shall be
made strictly according to seniority "
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment order of the learned
single Judge, the appellants filed the Writ Appeal, which
was dismissed by the Division Bench by passing a cryptic
order, which reads as follows:
"Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
counsel for the writ petitioner respondent.@@
JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
Direction to frame a scheme to absorb who are
possessing higher qualifications and who are eligible as per
the scheme in respect of casual labour who have put in five
years or more of continuous service in our opinion, is in
with the scheme under Articles 14 and 16 (1) of the
Constitution of India, The Appeal is accordingly dismissed."
The main thrust of the argument of Shri A.T.M.Sampath,
learned counsel appearing for the appellants was that the
Company being burdened with heavy accumulated loss of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
several crores of rupees has formulated a voluntary
retirement scheme for its workmen, in such a situation it is
not possible for the appellants to frame a scheme for
absorption of the writ petitioners (respondents herein) as
regular employees of the Company.
Percontra, Shri Nageshwara Rao learned counsel
appearing for the respondent-workers contended that these
workmen have been rendering service to the Company for
almost 10 years on daily wage basis without any job security
or service benefit and it is not a reasonable attitude of
the Company, a public sector undertaking of the central
Govt. to express reluctance to even frame a scheme for
absorption of these contract workers in the regular work
force of the Company particularly when the unit in which the
workers are engaged is continuing. According to Shri Rao,
the very fact that the respondent workers have been
continuously rendinging service in the Company over a decade
or more shows that the work entrusted to them is of a
permanent nature and their services cannot be dispensed
with.
We have carefully considered the contentions raised by
learned counsel for the parties. This Court, in the case of
State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Piara Singh & Ors. (supra)
considered the question of regularisation of ad hoc,
work-charged employees and casual labour. Therein this
Court observed: " So far as the work charged employees
and casual labour are concerned the effort must be to
regularise them as far as possible and as early as possible
subject to their fulfilling the qualifications if any,
prescribed for the post and subject also to availability of
work. If a casual labourer is continued for a fairly long
spell say two or three years - a presumption may arise that
there is regular need for his services. In such a
situation, it becomes obligatory for the concerned authority
to examine the feasibility of his regularisation. While
doing so, the authorities ought to adopt a positive approach
coupled with an empathy for the person. As has been
repeatedly stressed by this court security of tenure is
necessary for an employee to give his bens to the job . In
this behalf, we do commend the orders of the Govt. of
Haryana (contained in its letter dated 6.4.90 referred
hereinbefore) both in relation to work-charged employees as
well as casual labour."
The question of regularisation of casual labour
specifically came up for consideration before this Court in
the case of Raj Narain Prasad & Ors. Etc. etc. vs. State
of U.P. & Ors. etc.etc. 1998 (8) SCC 473, in which this
Court, referring to the case of State of Haryana & Ors. vs.
Plara Singh & Ors. (supra), made the following observation:
". To put it differently, therefore, the State has
prepared a regularisation scheme so far as work-charged
employees are concerned but has expressed its inability to
prepare any such scheme for daily-rated/muster-roll
employees. We have carefully perused the proposed scheme in
regard to work-charged employees and we felt that in clause
’D’ which talks of regularisation as per vacancies arising
in regular posts on the establishment a modification is
necessary in that there should be a review of the cadre
strength from year to year and based on the past requirement
and continuity of work charged employees, the cadre strength
should be increased by a certain percentage of the work
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
charged employees working over a period of time that may be
fixed by the Govt. so that the pace of regularisation is
accelerated and is not the same as obtaining in the past.
For example, if 100 work-charged employees have been
required throughout a period of time it could reasonably be
estimated that even if shedding takes place, a certain
percentage of those employees would certainly be retained
and a part of them could be absorbed by increasing the cadre
strength to that extent. An exercise of review in the cadre
strength from year to year, thereafter, cecomes necessary
because while on the one said the financial difficulties of
the State have to be kept in view on the other said the
welfare of the workmen who have served the State on
different projects has to be balanced. Concern is also to
be shown for those who have worked for a number of years and
have become ineligible for any other employment anywhere, be
that the private sector or the public sector. Therefore, a
balance has to be struck between the two competing interests
and that can be struck by a periodical revision of the cadre
strength from year to year. We must also impress on the
State Govt. that if work charged employees have been on the
establishment for long periods, the State should be liberal
in the matter of revision of the cadre strength so that the
benefit of regularisation is available to a reasonably good
number of work-charged employees who have been associated
with the State Departments for long periods "
Tested on the touch-stones of the principles laid down
in the decisions noted above and keeping in mind the mandate
of the Constitution under Articles 38(1), 39(e) & 43, we are
of the considered view that the directions issued by the
High Court to the appellants to frame a scheme for
regularisation of services of the writ petitioners does not
warrant interference. However, considering the submissions
made by learned counsel for the appellants that the Company
is under financial constraints and has decided to reduce its
work force, we would like to clarify that while framing the
scheme it would be open to the appellant-Company and the
officers concerned to assess the requirement of regular work
force in its different units, particularly, the units in
which the writ petitioners have been engaged over long
periods and also the necessity for alleviation of the
suffering to which the writ petitioners have been subjected
to during all these years and fix the strength of work force
so that the workers concerned are able to get the benefit of
regular service within a reasonable time. It goes without
saying that the absorption of the casual workers in regular
service will be subject to the fulfillment of the conditions
of eligibility qualification with relaxation of the age
prescribed under the rules.
Subject to the above modification, the judgement of
the learned Single Judge of the High Court, which was
confirmed by the Division Bench, is maintained. The appeals
are disposed of accordingly. No costs.