Judgment

Misra, J.-Delay condoned in C.C. No. 20506.

Special leave granted.

2. The Civil Appeal No. 4368 of 1991 is filed against the order dated March 30, 1990 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati, by virtue of which the order contained in letter No. R-IV 1/87 Orp/CRPF/EP-IV dated February 24, 1989 was quashed. Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. ........... of 1993 (C.C. 20506/93) arises out of order dated October 1, 1992, allowing the application by the respondents claiming enhancement of the allowance, directing the appellant to pay 50 per cent of the amount in terms of the judgment of the Gauhati Bench in the O.A. No. 17 of 1988 dated No. 30.3.1990 as aforesaid. The main matter is still pending before the Tribunal to be listed after disposal of the present appeals. The C.As. arising out of Special leave petition Nos. 502-503/96 are directed against the order of the same Tribunal by which it finally disposed of the matter with a direction to the appellant to pay 50 per cent of the ration allowance to the non-gazetted non-combatised staff also which shall be subject to the further orders to be passed by this Court.

3. The only question involved in all the aforesaid appeals is whether non-gazetted non-combatised staff when posted in static area that is to say non-operational area, is entitled for ration allowance or not?

4. The brief facts are, the concerned respondents are the members of the hospital staff working in the Central Reserve Police Force, II Based Hospital, Hyderabad. The contention of these respondents before the aforesaid tribunal and before us was that they were unfairly denied the benefit of grant of ration money, which is available to combatised non-gazetted persons of the same force. Hence the conten­tion was to direct the Union of India to grant them ration money on par with the said staff who are working on identical terms and condi­tions as applicable to the aforesaid combatised non-gazetted persons. The appellants have refuted this claim. The case is that non-gazetted persons of Central Reserve Police Force including ministerial staff were sanctioned ration money when they were working in operational areas. The said concession was extended to the members of the Central Reserve Police Force at a higher rate where the force is deployed on internal security duties. Further, this ration money at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month was for combatised persons posted at training institutions and static formations (non-operational areas) also. This concession was not admissible to the ministerial and non-gazetted staff who were not combatised. The services of these concerned re­spondents are governed by the Central Civil Services Rules and other such rules as framed from time to time by the Union of India under Article 309 of the Constitution while the other category of the em­ployees, namely, combatised personnel are governed by the Central Reserve Police Force Act. It is not in dispute that the respondents are non-combatised members of the force. The further case of the appellants is that this provision of ration money allowance was pro­vided in the statute for the combatised forces as they were working mostly on the operational sensitive areas. It is on these reasons a distinct classification was made by the Government to provide allow­ance to one and not to others. The Ministry of Home Affairs for the first time on 15th July, 1968 introduced this scheme by granting an allowance of Rs. 42/- per month to the non-gazetted personnel includ­ing ministerial and hospital staff of the Central Reserve Police Force working in certain operational areas. This amount was subsequently raised from time to time. Later in 1975 the allowances were graded in two operational areas like the State of Assam, Tripura, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur etc. In the said areas the allowances were payable at the rate of Rs. 74/- whereas in West Bengal, except Darjeeling District, the ration allowan