Fertilizer Corporation Of India LTD. vs Sarat Chandra Rath

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1996 Supreme(SC) 1321

1996(6) Supreme 570
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Verma and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.
Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. & Anr. -Appellants
versus
Sarat Chandra Rath and Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No 4807 of 1996
Decided on 23-8-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : Mr. V.R. Reddy, Addl. Solicitor General, Mr. Sunil Gupta, Ms. A.K. Verma and Mr. P.D. Tyagi, Advocates for J.B. Dadachanji & Co., Advocates.
For the Respondents : Mr. Tapas Ray, Sr. Advocate, Mr. B.C. Baruha and Mr. A. Bhattacharjee, Advocates.

Headnote:SERVICE LAW-Industrial Disputes Act, 1947-Section 18-Fixation of pay-Respondents 1 to 23, prior to 1.1.87, were employed as workmen-Seven years stagnation scheme-Placement of employees in highest workmen s pay scale in lowest officer s grade-Eligibility conditions-Method of fixation of pay of Junior Foremen, who were placed in officers grade prior to 1.1.87 and those placed in that grade after 1.1.87 -Whether discriminatory - (No) -These two categories of employees were in different classes-Para 5.3 of Office Memorandum dated 18-4-91 is not invalid.
       Held that respondents 1 to 23 as on 1st January, 1987 had not acquired the officers grade and were working as Assistant Foremen. On the other hand those of the workers who were in the highest grade and had been placed in the lowest scale of the officers grade had by 1st January, 1987 already acquired the officers grade. These two categories of employees, keeping in view their designation as well as the pay scales which they actually were drawing as on 1st January, 1987, were clearly in different classes. Employees like respondents 1 to 23, for the period 1st January, 1987 to the date on which they were placed in the officers pay scale on 1st September, 1987, were given the benefit of the revised pay scale of Rs. 1580 - 2842 (instead of the old scale of Rs. 915 - 1520) and were also paid arrears for the said period on the revised basis. For the period subsequent to the date of their placement in the officers scale the said respondents actually continued in the officers unrevised pay scale of Rs. 960 - 1610 till they were given the benefit of the revised pay scale of Rs. 2200 - 3600 with effect from 1st September, 1987 as a result of the aforesaid order dated 18th April, 1991. On the other hand pre 1st January, 1987 Junior Foremen (W) who were already in the officers scale of Rs. 960 - 1610 as on 31st December, 1986 continued to reain in the same scale as on 1st January, 1987. They were not given the advantage and were only placed in the revised workmen s pay scale of Rs. 1580 - 2842 which was made available to writ petitioners for the period 1st January, 1987 to 31st August 1987. However, when the revised pay scale of Rs. 2200 - 3600 for the officers was made available vide order dated 18th April, 1991, the same became applicable to them. It was in order to off set this disadvantage that by para 5.1 of the impugned circular a fitment allowance of Rs. 400/- was allowed to such pre 1st January, 1987 Junior Foremen (W). (Para 19)
       Further held that the two categories of Junior Foremen (W) were dealt with by two different sets of rules because as on 1st January, 1987 they were not similarly situate. Whereas the respondents herein were Assistant Foremen, those who were placed in the officers grade prior to 1st January, 1987 were regarded as officers. There could thus be no comparison between these two categories of persons. These two categories were unequal and respondents could not, in law, make any grievance if different principles were adopted in the fixation of their respective pay scales. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT

Kirpal, J.-This Appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Orissa High Court which had allowed the writ petition filed by 23 workmen of the appellants, respondents 1 to 23, and while striking down a paragraph of a circular according to which their pay was fixed, a direction was issued for re-fixation of the pay in a manner indicated by the High Court.

2. The respondents 1 to 23, prior to 1st January 1987, were employed as workmen by the appellants. On 20th January 1982 a seven years stagnation scheme was introduced by the appellants whereunder its employees in the highest workmen s pay scale, who had been stagnating for seven years, were promoted to the lowest officer s scale. These employees, who were workmen and were called senior operators, senior technicians etc. were, on their placement in the lowest officer s scale, designated as Assistant Foremen (AFM D ), Junior Officers (JO D ) etc. On such placement in the officer s grade these erstwhile workmen were treated as officers and they received all the facilities admissible as officers.

3. On 30th October, 1983 a draft of settlement under Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act ) for the pay revision was finalised between the management and the workmen. Based on this on 25th February, 1984 a further settlement under Section 18 of the Act was entered into between the management of the FCI Talchar unit, the appellants herein and its workmen. This settlement was, inter alia, for revision of various pay scales. The revised pay scales so fixed were to be effective from 1st January 1983 to 31st December, 1986, the highest scale of workmen being Rs. 915- 1520. The agreement further contemplated that the next wage agreement was to be effective from 1st January, 1987. It also sought to touch upon some of the anomalies which were prevailing with respect to the implementation of seven years stagnation scheme. The relevant salient features of this agreement/settlement were that with effect from 11th August, 1986 the workmen in the higher scale on fulfilling eligibility conditions under the stagnation scheme were only to be placed (not promoted) from their existing scale of Rs. 915-1520 to the lowest officer s scale of Rs. 960-1610 and on such placement they were to be given the designation of Junior Foreman (W). On such placement the said persons were entitled to D.A. as admissible to officers but all other allowances, benefits, union membership etc., which they had as workmen, were to remain unaltered.

4. As a result of the aforesaid settlement dated 11th August, 1986 there were, as on 31st December 1986, employees who had already undergone placement from the highest workers scale of Rs. 915-1520 to the lowest officer s scale of Rs. 960-1610 on account of the fact that they had fulfilled the eligibility conditions under the seven years stagnation scheme on some dates before 31st December, 1986. However, workmen like the respondents who had not fulfilled the aforesaid eligibility conditions under the stagnation scheme as on 31st December 1986 continued to remain in the workmen s category, as on that day, in the pay scale of Rs. 915-1520.

5. The earlier agreement whereby pay scales were fixed from 1st January 1983 to 31st December, 1986 having come to an end, the Government of India, by an order dated 4th February, 1987, decided that negotiations should take place between the management and the companies so as to bring into existence the new wage settlement to be made effective from 1st January, 1987. Pending fresh fixation of pay scales the workmen and the officers with effect from 1st January,1987 continued to get their salaries in the existing pay scales, i.e., the respondents 1 to 23 in the pay scales of Rs. 915-1520 and the persons placed in the lowest pay scale of the officers category in the pay scale of Rs. 960-1610.

6. The said respondents 1 to 23 fulfilled the eligibility conditions under the seven years stagnation schem

Click Here to Read the rest of this document