JITENDRA KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two groups of mutually irreconcilable judicial verdicts, any one of which can be imple mented at the peril of the other, has necessitated this reference to an Expanded Bench to decide which of the conflicting views should mow hold the field. A post cognizance realisation that the issue involved could have extensive ramification as one of the two views, that flows from a Division Bench Judgment in the case of Achyut Chandra Pathak & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in (2000) 1 GLT 243, has been consistently applied and followed, had led the Full Bench to direct that notices be issued to all such muster roll/work charged employees in all Departments of the State, who are awaiting regularization as well as those who have been so regularized, in order to ensure that they do not go unheard.

(2.) The facts necessary to understand the precise scope of the reference made to the Full Bench needs to be amplified at the outset In the several engineering and works related departments of the State, a muster roll of workers is maintained in addition to the employees working in the regular cadre. Such workers are known as Muster Roll Workers. Also, in such engineering and works related Departments of the State there is another category of workers whose tenure of service and pay and allowances are charged to a particular on going work. Such employees are commonly known as work charged employees. Though muster roll and work charged establishments are normally to be found in the works related departments, which are basically the engineering departments of the State, the practice of engaging such workers has virtually come to be followed in all Departments of the State. In addition to the above two categories, each department of the State employs a large number of casual workers including fixed pay and daily rated workers. The extent of such employment in the State of Assam, which is outside the mainstream of employment, it must be noticed, is considerable.

(3.) In the year 1983, and to be precise, on 23.9.1983, a Cabinet decision was taken to the effect that all muster roll labourers working in all Departments of the State, who have completed 15 years of service or more, may be regularized as Grade IV employees. What happened thereafter and how the decision of the Cabinet was implemented, if at all, is not very clear save and except that in a communication dated 15.3.1984 issued by the Chief Secretary of the State, the General Secretary of the P.W.D. Employees Union was informed that muster roll workers of the Public Works Department and other Engineering Departments, who have completed 15 years of continuous service was to be regularized with effect from 1.8.1984. By the said communication, the workers Union was further informed that work charged employees of the Engineering Departments, who have completed 5 years continuous service, were to be brought under the regular establishment. Admittedly and evidently, no scheme was prepared or detailed principles were laid down as to how the Cabinet decision dated 23.9.1983 was to be executed and implemented consistent with the rights under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of such persons who came within the purview of the aforesaid Cabinet decision dated 23.9.1983. The position remained unchanged until the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam addressed a commu nication bearing No. ABP 176/91/Pt.1/188 dated 20.4.1995 to all the commissioners and Secretaries of the Government of Assam. By the aforesaid Communication dated 20.4.1995 the Chief Secretary informed all concerned that in spite of the decision of the State Government to regularize the services of work charged and muster roll employees, no action for regularization of such employees have been taken. Accordingly, the Chief Secretary informed all the Departments to take necessary action, in consultation with the Finance Department, for early regularization of the services of work charge and muster roll employees who were engaged prior to 1.4.1993. The aforesaid communication dated 20.4.1995 was followed by an Office memorandum dated 11.10.1995 issuing strict instructions to all concerned not to engage any further muster roll/work charged employees after 1.4.1993 and further a clarification was issued on 13.10.1995 to the effect that the O.M. dated 20.4.1995 was to operate provided the muster roll/work charged employees were not discharged or terminated on or before 20.4.1995.