INDER PAL YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Articles 41 and 42 of the Constitution notwithstanding, there are certain grey areas where the rule of hire and fire, a legacy of laissez faire, even in government employment still rules the roost. Casual labour employed on projects also known as 'project casual labour' is one such segment of employment where one may serve for years and remain a daily-rated worker without a weekly off, without any security of service, without the protection of equal pay for equal work. In short at the sweet will and mercy of the local satraps. Even the formidable railwaymen's unions least cared for these helpless and hapless workmen. Suddenly a torrent of Writ Petition and petitions for special leave awakened this court to the plight of these workmen. In quick succession, 48 writ petitions and 32 petitions for special leave flooded this court. In each writ petition/special Leave Petition, the grievance was that even though the workmen styled as 'project casual labour' had put in continuous service for years on end to wit ranging from 1974 Till 1983, yet their services were terminated with impunity under the specious plea that the project on which they were employed has been wound up on its completion and their services were no more needed. No one is unaware of the fact that Railway Ministry has a perspective plan spreading over years nay decades and projects are waiting in queue for execution and yet these workmen were shunted out (to use a cliche from the railway vocabulary) without any chance of being re-employed. Some of them rushed to the court and obtained interim relief. Some were not so fortunate. At one stage some of these petitions were set down for final hearing and the judgment was reserved. When some other similar matters came up, Mr K. C. Bhagat, the then learned Additional Solicitor-General, requested the court not to render the judgment because he would take up the matter with the railway Ministry to find a just and humane solution affecting the livelihood of these unfortunate workmen. As the future of lacs of workmen going under the label of casual project labour was likely to be affected, we repeatedly adjourned these matters to enable the railway Ministry to work out a scientific scheme.

(2.) Railway Ministry framed a scheme and circulated the same amongst others to all the General Managers of Indian Railways including production units as per its circular No. E (NG) 11/84/cl/41 dated 1/06/1984. In the scheme it was stated that all the General managers were directed to implement the decision of the Railway ministry by the target dates. It was further stated that a detailedletter regarding group 5.1 (ii) would follow. Such a letter was issued on Jun 25/06/1984. Thereafter, these matters were set out for examining the fairness and justness of the scheme and whether the court would be in a position to dispose of these petitions in view of the scheme. That is how these matters came up before us.

(3.) The relevant portions of the scheme read as under: