DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of Writ Petitions challenge the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) in I.D. Nos.62 to 67 of 2011, dtd. 31/5/2012. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as Management and Workmen.

(2.) The Management is the Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railways and the Workmen are those who were working in the Canteens running at Basin Bridge Yard. The Workmen have been working for more than three decades. It is an admitted case that Mr. C. Porchezian, Petitioner in I.D. No.63 of 2011 was working from 1989 and Mr. Selvan, the Petitioner in I.D. No.65 of 2011 was working from 1987. The remaining have also worked, as pointed out above, for more than two decades.

(3.) The Basin Bridge Yard Canteen caters to the needs of the Railway Servants of about 1500 persons. As per Sec. 46 of the Factories Act, if a canteen is being run for more than 250 Employees, it is statutory in nature and for Workmen less than 250, while it is non-statutory, it is treated as nonrecognised canteen. The difference being that, one is being run as per the Statute and one as per the Railway Manual 2831. In and about 1991, a circular had been issued by the Railway Board in E(W)/91/CN/Mass Circular, dtd. 29/11/1991, which stated that the canteens, which are nonstatutory but recognised, require prior approval of the Railway Board.