Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF RAILWAYPARCEL PORTERS UNION THROUGH I
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/07/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (6) 577 1996 SCALE (5)397
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
By Order dated February 5, 1996, this Court directed
the respondents to appoint a high level officer to enquire
whether the petitioners have been working as Casual Porters
for a long time as perennial source of work and if so why
they have not been regularised in the light of the law of
this Court laid in National Federation of Railway Porters,
Vendors & Bearers v. Union of India & Ors [ JT (1995) 4 SC
568 ], Pursuant thereto, the respondents have appointed Mr.
Vikram Chopras Chief Marketing Manager to enquire and submit
a report to this Court. The said officer conducted the
enquiry and stated that out of 503 petitioners in Writ
Petition Nos.568 and 711 of 1995 the claim of 430
petitioners were verified. They were on the rolls of the
registered cooperative societies of the Lucknow, Moradabad
and Allahabad Divisions. Despite their working as porters
for several years, since their names do not find place in
the earlier petitions, they could not be regularised
thinking that the relief in those writ petitions was
confined to the persons whose names were expressly
mentioned. Consequently, he recommended for regularisation
of that services as mentioned thus:
"(i) In order to comply with the
Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment
that the Railway should absorb
persons supplied by the societies
to work as labourers for parcel
handling, to the extent that posts
which are of perennial and
permanent nature can be justified,
and to absorb persons as per their
length of working as such parcel
handling labour, it is recommended
that Lucknow, Allahabad, Bikaner
and Jodhpur divisions should be
asked to fall in line with the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
section taken at Moradabad Division
i.e.
(a) Conduct a work study at all the
stations where such parcel handling
is still being done by such labour
and arrive at the number of posts
required on a permanent and
perennial basis, and
(b) Screen all such eligible
labourers as per the guide lines of
Hon’ble Supreme Court and as per
the Railway rules and absorb them
to the extent that posts are
justified.
(ii) The case one person who is
working at Lucknow Jn. of N.E. Rly.
may be referred to General
Manager/N.E.Rly., for necessary
action.
He also found that he could not verify petitioners at
S1. Nos. 23 to 72 whose names have been mentioned in the
list appended by him, as the contract of the society under
which they claimed to be working was terminated w.e.f.
November 7, 1991. As a result, he could not find any record
to verify them. Shri M.N. Krishnamani, learned senior
counsel undertakes to give all the details with correct
facts regarding them to Mr. Vikram Chopra, C.M.M. who is
directed to enquire into their claims and if they are found
to be eligible, the benefit of the order passed by the Court
in the above order would be made available to them. As
regards petitioner No.73, it was stated that he claims to be
working in Lucknow Junction in Northern Eastern Railway and
could not be verified. The General Manager, Northern Eastern
Railway is directed to have the address of petitioner No.73,
namely, Mohd. Nafis, son of Aleem, verified and also whether
he was working as a Casual Porter at Lucknow Junction
Station and if so whether he is on par with those candidates
whose services were directed to be regularised. In case he
is found to be working then the benefit of the directions
given in the aforesaid decision would available to him also.
The service of all those petitioners be dealt with as per
the law laid in the aforementioned judgment.
The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of the
above extent.