BABULAL BISHNOI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The application for early hearing is allowed. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the out-come of this writ petition is squarely governed by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated October 6, 2004 passed in Union of India and others v. Ramchander and another, in Civil Appeal Nos. 7949-7950 of 2001. It was pointed out that the said appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was in the like case, as is the case in hand, wherein the workmen who were initially appointed as Casual Labourers (Mazdoors) in the Stores maintained by the Army, having headquarters at Jodhpur, on daily wages for a period of 89 days and on completion of the period, they were terminated from service and again they were appointed as Casual Labourers immediately after their termination and thus they were terminated and re-appointed in four spells. Originally their salary was fixed at Rs.750/- per month plus allowances and thereafter it was raised at Rs.35/- per day and later to Rs.40/- per day. When their services were first terminated, they were being paid Rs.40/- per day. When the workmen were terminated, they approached the Central Administrative Tribunal and they contended that they would have completed the requisite 240 days of actual working in a calendar year and were in continuous employment for more than one year, but for the intermittent termination of their services and, therefore, their termination was violative of Sections 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(2.) The Central Administrative Tribunal did not accept this plea and refused to grant any relief. However, when the aggrieved workmen approached this Court by filing writ petitions, the Division Bench of this Court allowed the claim of the workmen and directed that they shall be reinstated in service with effect from March 31, 2001 and further directed that full pay and allowances due to them shall be paid for the period they were out of service.

(3.) This order of Division Bench was the subject-matter of appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court to which we have referred to above. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has affirmed the order about re-employment but modified the order relating to payment of entire salaries and allowances for the period they were out of service to the extent of 50% back wages from the date of their termination till their re-employment.