DHARMA NAND Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner Dharma Nand was appointed on 28/3/1988 as salesman at Station Canteen, Kotdwar, Garhwal Rifles Regimental Centre, Lansdowne, u. P. and the second petitioner Dayal Singh was appointed on 15/9/1988 at the same canteen. Both of them were being paid consolidated amount of rs. 550. 00 per month. Later, on 7/4/1989 their remuneration was enhanced to rs. 750. 00 per month and they were appointed as salesmen in Golden Fish canteen, Kotdwar and they were promoted as Storekeepers In-charge on 1/9/1995 and their remuneration was enhanced. In December 1998 the first petitioner was terminated from the service and he was informed that he had completed 5 years' tenure, and his service was no longer required. Similarly, the service of the second petitioner was also terminated. The counsel for the petitioners submits that these petitioners had been working as canteen employees under the control of the Defence Ministry and in view of the decision of this Court in Union of India v. M. Aslam they should have been treated as Central Government employees and their termination was illegal. In that case the question arose whether the employees working in the Canteen stores Department Canteens under the Defence Ministry could be treated as government servants or not. This Court held that: "as has been stated earlier, for effective functioning of the defence services it is absolutely necessary to provide canteen facilities throughout the country and while the Canteen Stores Department serve as wholesale outlet it is the Unit-run Canteens which serve as retail outlet. A set of rules regulating the terms and conditions of service of the employees of unit-run Canteens have been framed which confers all-pervasive control over the employees with the authorities of defence services. Though the funding of the Unit-run Canteens is not made out of the Consolidated fund of India but it is made by the Canteen Stores Department and this department in its turn has formed a part of the Ministry of Defence, admittedly. In Parimal Chandra Raha v. LIC of India the employees of different canteens in different offices of Life Insurance Corporation whether were employees of the Corporation itself was under consideration by this Court. This Court evolved four principles which are quoted hereunder:

(3.) Applying the aforesaid principles canteen employees were to be treated as government servants.