SOMU KUMAR CHATTERJEE Vs. DISTRICT SIGNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these cases the petitioners have obtained a rule from This Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of INdia challenging termination of their services by different respondents with effect from different dates and the impugned orders are contained in different Annexures to the writ applications which will be dealt with separately. The contentions and the facts leading to these applications being substantially the same and the grievances also being the same in all the cases they are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners' case is that they were initially employed as casual labourers and on completion of their continuous six months of service acquired the status of temporary employees and were granted the authorised scales of pay and allowances with effect from the dates mentioned against their names in Office Order No. E/I/Misc/CPC/CON, dated the 20th December 1965, issued by the District Signal and Telecommunication Engineer (Construction), N.F. Railway, Katihar. THE relevant extracts of the aforesaid office order are contained in Annexures 1 to 6 to these applications. THE petitioners got the scale of pay recommended by the Central Pay Commission and were also paid annual increments as and when they fell due. THEy were also allowed benefits of paid casual leave., sick leave and earned leave. It is said that the Railway Board by its circular No. E(NG) 6b-CL 25, dated the 29th January, 1966, clarified that the continuity of service of the casual labourers after acquisitioning temporary status would count for the purposes of post retirement passes and they would be allowed to carry out the leave at their credit to any new post and fixed 58 years as the age of superannuation. THE Railway Board by another circular No. E(NG) 60CL/13, dated the 2nd August, 1962, directed that the casual labourer shall be employed in regular vacancies. THE Railway Board further provided that the casual labourers who have acquired temporary status will have a prior claim over others to permanent recruitment and will not have to observe the formalities of going through the employment exchange. By another circular, the Railway Board ordered that the staff rendered surplus in project, construction, etc., were not required to submit their applications in the usual form applicable for outsiders for the advertised posts, but the Railway project/construction concerned would forward the full service particulars of such staff with their qualifications to the screening committee, and that the casual labourers who have attained the temporary status will be entitled to the benefits of Discipline and Appeal Rules. It is said that opposite party No. 1 terminated the services of the petitioners by orders dated the 1st January, 1969, and the 17th January, 1968, and the petitioners thereupon moved This Court in C.W.J.C. Nos. 289, 360 and 361 of 1968, against their termination of services, and by its judgment dated the 23rd May, 1969, This Court allowed all the writ petitions and issued a writ of mandamus against the opposite parties commanding them to reinstate the petitioners in their services and to pay their arrears and other allowances after adjusting the amount that they had received. (See Somu Kumar Chatterjee and Anr. v. District Signal Telecommunication Engineer and Anr. case 1970-II L.L.J. 179).

(3.) MR. Ranen Roy appearing for the petitioners challenged the impugned order (Annexure 6) on the following grounds: