GURBACHAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4549-CAT of 2005, 19096-CAT of 2004, 20081-CAT of 2004 and 16258-CAT of 2004 as common question of facts and law have been raised. All these petitions are directed against order dated 24.8.2004 (P-9), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench Chandigarh (for brevity, 'the Tribunal'). The petitioners had earlier filed Original Applications before the Tribunal challenging termination of their services on various grounds. They have been working on the posts of Salesman, Store Keeper or Summary/Ledger Clerk. Some of them are ex-servicemen as would be clear from the following table, which includes the details of OA No., date of appointment and date of their termination: Case No. OA No./ Name of Applicant Date of appointment Date of termination of service. CWP No. 16258-CAT of 2004 180/PB/2002 H.S. Grewal Summary/Ledger Clerk. Ex-Serviceman 1.4.1988 14.6.2000 CWP No.19096 of 2004 198/PB/2002 Piara Singh Salesman 7.8.1990 14.6.2000 CWP No. 20081 CAT of 2004 235/PB/2002 K.C. Yadav Counter Attendant/ Store Keeper 1.11.1977 14.6.2000 CWP No. 4549 of 2005 197/PB/2002 Gurbachan Singh Salesman May, 1986 14.6.2000

(2.) They were engaged in Golden Arrow Unit Canteen, Ferozepur, in their different capacities such as Salesman etc. as indicated in the above table. They had filed O.As., which were allowed on 20.8.2002, 11.10.2002, 20.8.2002 and 30.9.2002 respectively. It is appropriate to mention that the OAs have been filed after the dismissal of civil suits on account of the fact that in the case of Union of India v. Mohd. Aslam, (2001) 1 SCC 720, it was held that the duties of Salesman or other employees in such retail outlets of unit run canteens must be held to be duties rendered by the employees under the Government. As a consequence of the decision in the case of Mohd. Aslam (supra), the civil suits were dismissed and thereafter they had filed OAs before the Tribunal.

(3.) The principal ground put forward before the Tribunal was that as per the terms and conditions of appointment, they were required to be given notice before termination of their services. OA No.198/PB/2002 filed by one Piara Singh (petitioner in CWP No. 19096 of 2004) was allowed on 20.8.2002, holding that the matter was covered by an earlier judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Mohinder Singh v. Union of India (OA No. 914/HR/1997, decided on 16.5.2001). Accordingly, the termination order dated 14.6.2000, terminating the services of two of the petitioners were quashed and respondents were directed to reinstate them in service with all consequential benefits. Likewise the other three OAs were also allowed vide order dated 30.9.2002.