Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 9182 of 1996
PETITIONER:
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS UNION
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/02/2001
BENCH:
S. Rajendra Babu & Shivaraj V. Patil.
JUDGMENT:
L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J
RAJENDRA BABU, J. :
This Court by an order made on 16.7.1996 disposed of
Civil Appeal No. 9182 of 1996 giving certain directions in
regard to reinstatement of the workmen who had been
retrenched for identification and reinstatement and for
certain incidental reliefs. Inasmuch as the litigation
between the parties is one of several decades, the benefit
of reinstatement as directed by this Court could not be
given to some of the employees who had died between 1975 to
1996. Therefore, an application I.A. No. 5 has been filed
in Civil Appeal No. 9182 of 1996 which has been disposed of
earlier. The claim made in this I.A. is basically for
appointment and posting of kith and kin of deceased workmen
on the basis of identification of the said kith and kin
under terms and conditions set out by this Court in the
order referred to by us. When the matter came up for
consideration on 17.2.1998 this Court noticed that the only
prayer that survives for consideration is the prayer
relating to appointment of kith and kin of the deceased
workmen and this Court gave certain directions in regard to
furnishing the latest list of claimants for such
appointment. Again on 25.2.2000 when this matter came up
for consideration this Court directed the applicants to
prepare two lists out of the main general list (which is at
page No. 276 of the paper book) and the first list shall be
of those persons who have died between 1975 and 6.8.1989 and
second list shall be of those persons who have died on or
after 7.8.1989 till 1996. On furnishing of such lists, the
Food Corporation of India was directed to scrutinise the
lists of those persons who have died on or after 7.8.1989
and who would have got benefit of the order of this Court
dated 16.7.1996, but for their unfortunate death after 1989
and before 1996 and to consider the claim of the kith and
kin of the deceased workman as per the rules and regulations
and policy decision dated 7.8.1989 as subsequently modified
by two other policy decisions. So far as the first list was
concerned, it is made clear that order will be passed
thereafter. In regard to second list furnished an affidavit
has been filed on 7.8.2000. The stand of the respondents is
that the policy changed after 7.8.1989 and, therefore, there
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
was necessity for this Court to give directions as regards
those persons who have died prior to 7.8.1989. The stand of
the respondents is that the circular dated 7.8.1989 applies
only to DPS workers who had died in harness and as such it
is imperative that the said workman should have been
actually working when he died but the applicability of the
circular dated 7.8.1989 and, therefore, contended that the
cases of persons who were not actually reinstated and who
died prior to reinstatement cannot be considered for
appointment on compassionate grounds. This stand of the
respondent is plainly unacceptable because legally
retrenched workmen were directed to be but had not been
though entitled to be reinstated. Therefore, what is to be
considered is the cases of those persons who had been
directed to be reinstated and have not been reinstated and
such persons must be deemed to be in service and died in
harness for the purpose of this order and applicability of
the circular dated 7.8.1989. If this aspect is borne in
mind, the same directions that have been given by this Court
on 25.2.2000 by which the other part of the I.A. had been
disposed of shall also be applicable. Though several
aspects have been addressed before us, it is not necessary
to consider them in these proceedings because the other
directions issued by this Court in regard to identification
of the workmen or their kith and kin and applicability of
the circulars will be the same. So far as those persons who
had died prior to 7.8.1989 are concerned, the directions
shall be the same except in regard to the change in the
policy that has taken place subsequent to that date.
Therefore, the I.A. shall stand disposed of in the
terms as aforesaid.