KANPUR SURAKSHA KARAMCHARI UNION REGD KANPUR SURAKSHA KARAMCHARI UNION RBGD R N SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved in these petitions is whether the workmen who were working in canteens established under S. 46 of the Factories Act. 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in Ordnance Equipment Factory, Kanpur, Central Ordnance Depot, Kanpur and Air Force Station. Kanpur are entitled to claim the period of service in such canteens prior to 22-10-1980 as part of the qualifying service for claiming pension.

(2.) The three industrial establishments, referred to above, namely; Ordnance Equipment Factory, Central Ordnance Depot and Air Force Station, Kanpur are defence establishments forming part of the Defence Department of the Union of India. By the Order No. 18(1)80/D(JCM) dated the 25th July, 1981 sanction was accorded by the President of India to treat all employees of canteens established in Defence Industrial Installations under S. 46 of the Act as Government employees with immediate effect. By an amendment, the said Government Order was given effect from 22-10-1980. The Government Order further provided that it would be applicable to all employees of the statutory canteens irrespective of the type and management of the canteens and till the Government decided otherwise the employees of the said canteens would continue to be governed by the terms and conditions of service laid down in their appointment letters and contracts of employment already subsisting. It was further stated that they would be continued to be paid such emoluments to which they were entitled then. When some of the employees retired after 22-10-1980 they applied for payment of pension. The Defence Department declined to treat the period of service rendered by them prior to 22-10-1980 in such canteens as part of qualifying service for purposes of pension on the ground that it was only with effect from 22-10-1980 from which date they had become Government employees their qualifying service could be counted. Aggrieved by the rejection of the claim of the workers in those canteens, the petitioners herein, have filed these petitions in this Court for declaration that the service rendered by the employees of such canteens prior to 22-10-1980 should be treated as qualifying service for purposes of pension. On behalf of the Union of India counter-affidavits were filed resisting the claim of the petitioners. As the information furnished in the counter-affidavits was inadequate for purposes of disposing of the cases, the Court by its order dated 22-3-1988 directed the Union of India to file a fuller affidavit giving information about the following matters, namely; the authority which had the power to appoint workers in such canteens prior to 22-10-1980, the authority which was paving salary to the workers in the said canteens prior to 22-10-1980, the authority which was controlling such canteens prior to 22-10-1980, the particulars of the persons who were consumers of the service rendered by the said canteens prior to 22-10-1980 and other relevant matters in order to decide the status of the workers in the said canteens prior to 22-10-1980. There upon a further affidavit has been filed by Shri N. Sivasubramanian, Joint Secretary (Ordnance Factories) to the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi. In the said affidavit it is stated that (a) prior to being declared as Government servants w.e.f. 22-10-1980 the canteen workers in Ordnance Factories were under the canteen managing committees constituted as per provisions of Section 46 of the Act; (b) the supervision and control of such canteens were exercised by the Canteen Managing Committee consisting of equal number of elected representatives of the factory, workers and nominees of the management and the Canteen Managing Committee was the appointing authority of the canteen workers; and (c) that the Canteen Managing Committee was paving the salary to the workers and also controlling the canteens. It was further admitted that by the letter dated 24-5-1965 of the Ministry of Defence it had been ordered thus:

(3.) It is seen from the above letter of the Ministry of Defence that prior to 24-5-1965 there were three kinds of canteens, namely:(i) canteens run by contractors, (ii) canteens run by co-operative societies of the staff, and (iii) canteens which had been established under Section 46 of the Act. We are not concerned with the first two categories of the canteens but only with the last category of canteens in this case. The above Ministry of Defence letter provides for subsidising the canteens maintained in Defence Industrial Installations under Section 46 of the Act. It also gives directions regarding pay-scales, conditions of service etc. The consumers of the services rendered by such canteens were the factory employees for whose benefit they had been established. It is also not disputed that the building or buildings in which such canteens had been established formed part of the industrial establishment concerned.