M. Ramadoss and Others vs Union of India and Others

A. Arumughaswamy, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorarified

mandamus to call for the records of the respondents particularly pertaining to the order of the second respondent made in his proceedings No.

45428/MR/OT/CAT/GS/MT-7 dated 01.3.2011 rejecting the representation of the petitioners for regularisation of their services as Washermen

(Dhobies) and quash the same and direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in the post of Washermen (Dhobies) in the

third respondent Academy, if necessary by forming a suitable scheme for their absorption as regular employees in the respondents department,

from the date of their initial engagement or any other cut off date with all attendant monetary benefits. The petitioners are working as Washermen

(Dhobies) in the third respondent Officers Training Academy. The petitioners were engaged in the washing of the cloths of the Gentlemen Cadets

under going training in the third respondent Academy. Initially washing of the said cloths were entrusted with contractor up to the year 1976.

Thereafter, the work was undertaken by the third respondent directly. In view of the termination of the contract system, the third respondent

decided to wash the cloths by employing the petitioners dhobies as casual employees. The petitioners were entrusted with the said jobs from

February 1976 continuously till date. The petitioners were also issued appointment order as casual workers and gate pass as they are employed

with Quarter Master Section of the third respondent Academy.

While so, the petitioners were terminated from their services once in every 90 days or such frequent intervals so as to create an artificial break

to avoid regularisation of their services. The petitioners were paid their wages on monthly basis. The petitioners made several representation

requesting the third respondent to regularize their services. In the year 1998, the Central Government has formulated a scheme, namely, Casual

Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme of Government of India, 1993 vide O.M. No. 51016/2/90-Estt(c) dated

10.9.1993, for the regularisation of the Casual Employees working in different departments. As per the said scheme, the petitioners, who served

more than one year of service, also become eligible for regularisation. Therefore, the petitioners made representation before the respondents. Since

the same was not considered, the petitioners approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 1032 of 1999. While disposing

the said O.A., the Tribunal observed that the services of the petitioners shall not be disturbed pending disposal of their representation. Even

thereafter, the second respondent has not taken any action on the grievances expressed by the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners are before this

Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are working as Washermen under the third respondent directly from the

year 1976 onwards and their services have been terminated once in every 90 days in order to avoid regularisation. Hence, the learned counsel for

the petitioners prays that the writ petition has to be allowed.

The learned counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioners are voluntarily working as Washermen under the third respondent and

they were never employed by the third respondent, as there is no provision for their employment in the Rules and hence, the question of

regularisation does not arise at all.

It is seen that the petitioners were engaged in the washing of the cloths of the Gentlemen Cadets undergoing training in the third respondent

academy. The work was directly undertaken by the third respondent. It is also seen that the services of the petitioners have been terminated once

in 90 days or such frequent intervals so as to create break in service.

But it is the stand of the respondents that the petitioners are voluntarily workers and the payment have been made on the basis of the strength of

the Gentleman Cadets and therefore, there is no question of continuous employment. It is also the stand of the respondents that there is no such

post in the Department. Therefore, the respondents expressed their inability to regularise the services of the petitioners.

Pending the writ petition, this Court by order dated 13.3.2007 observed as follows:

This Court has suggested to the learned counsel for the respondents that these petitioners are under engagement of the respondents since 1963,

and therefore, having regard to the ruling of the Supreme Court and the earlier proceedings this Court has made a suggestion to the respondent,

whether the petitioners can be put under a scheme with certain benefits. The counsel seeks two weeks time to consult the authorities and inform the

same to his Court.

In spite of the said suggestions, the respondents have not taken any action. Therefore, it is clear that the respondents are not interested in taking

any action with regard to the grievances expressed by the petitioners.

From the perusal of the papers, it is clear that the petitioners have been terminated from service once in 89 days or such frequent intervals in

order to avoid proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act. This act of the respondents are condemnable and it is nothing but an unfair labour

practice.

Though second and third respondents claim themselves that they are safeguarding the Nation in the border, they could not safeguard their own

poor employees/washer man, who are washing the dirty cloths belongs to the Gentleman Cadets undergoing training in the third respondent. The

second and third respondents, after enjoying all the facilities and benefits extended to them such as tax benefits and for their purchase which

includes liquor, have denied the right of the poor workers which is against the law. Even the respondents have not come forward to formulate a

scheme as suggested by this Court. This Court expresses regret over the said act of the respondents. Therefore, the respondents are directed to

formulate a scheme to regularise the services of the petitioners. The said exercise shall be carried out within a period of two months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.