Important Point
Company paid staff work under Court Liquidator in Calcutta High Court and under Official Liquidator in other High Courts are discharging duties identical to that of Government paid staff in same Liquidator’s Office and therefore they are entitled to be equally treated and entitled to all benefits conferred to and enjoyed by Government paid employees attached to Offical Liquidator.

Headnote:Service Law - Equal pay for equal work-Company paid staff working under Court Liquidator in Calcutta High Court and under Official Liquidator in other High Courts-Company paid staff had been discharging duties years together identical to that of Government paid staff in same Liquidator’s Office-They are entitled to be absorbed/regularised-They are entitled to be equally treated and all benefits as are conferred and enjoyed by Government paid employees attached to office of Official Liquidator should be extended to them.
Held : We have already set out at more than one place about the findings of the Calcutta High Court and the Kerala High Court rejecting the contention put forward on behalf of the Union of India that the company paid staff were only appointed as per the order of the concerned Company Judge and the salaries were fixed by the Company Judge; that their appointments were purely on temporary basis and solely for the purpose of the work of liquidation proceedings under the charge of the Official Liquidator and that, therefore, they cannot be absorbed as regular Government servants. Both the High Courts have found that the company paid staff had been discharging the duties years together without any break identical to that of the government paid staff in the same Liquidator’s Office. It was also found that the company paid staff working both under the Court Liquidator and the Official Liquidator were grossly under paid and they have no retiral benefits even after working for 10-25 years. In view of the peculiar facts of these cases and the positive findings of the High Courts with which we concur, we are unable to agree with the contention of the learned senior counsel for the appellants that the company paid staff cannot be absorbed/ regularised as they were not employed by the Government in accordance with the rules; that they knew their appointments were only temporary and that their pay was not from the consolidated fund. The orders of the High Court challenged in these appeals do not call for any interference having regard to the facts presented before the High Courts. (Paras 19, 20 & 22)

Judgment

K. Venkataswami, J.-The respondent Nos. 2 to 64 in Civil Appeal No. 5642/94 are the employees in the office of the Court Liquidator in the Calcutta High Court. Aggrieved by the disparity in pay-scales and deprivation of allowances and retiral benefits, they moved matter No. 756 of 1991 before a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court. They claimed that they must be treated as employees of the Central Government and should be given full status of permanent Central Government employees on the expiry of 360 days of joining their service besides regular pay-scales with avenues for promotion, pension, provident fund and other service benefits on the basis of their length of service.

2. The learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court ruled that writ petitioners/respondent Nos. 2 to 64 herein should be given the full status of permanent Central Government employees on the expiry of 360 days of their joining the service. However, the learned Judge restricted the arrears for a period of three years prior to the date of the said judgment. The learned Judge safeguarded the right with reference to their fitment in the appropriate scale and the benefit of promotion having due regard to the length of service. Likewise, the learned Judge ordered their entitlement for pension, provident fund, gratuity again with regard to their length of service.

3. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the appellants preferred an appeal to the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court.

4. The learned Judges, after carefully considering the rival submissions, found that the respondent Nos. 2 to 64 had been working for the last 20-25 years. Their service was neither regularised nor they were given the status of Government employees; their pay-scales were not inconformity with that of the pay-scales of their counterparts in various other Departments/Offices; that they were given very low scale of pay without any permanent or quasi-permanent status and they were required to retire on attaining the age of 58 years but empty handed. The Division Bench also found that the appellants could not substantiate the contention that the respondents were not in work of perennial nature and as such cannot be asorbed as Central Government employees. The learned Judges further found that there was no reasonable basis for making classification or denial of equal treatment between the employees of the Court Liquidator and the Official Liquidator when they were found to turn out the same and similar nature of work. Ultimately, the learned Judges found that the respondents herein could not be denied the benefits and status which were enjoyed by their counterparts employed in the Office of Official Liquidator. It was further held that there was no rational basis for making classification between the two groups of employees and, therefore, the respondents were entitled to be equally treated and all the benefits as were conferred and enjoyed by the employees attached to the Office of Official Liquidator should be extended to them as well. In the light of the findings as noticed above, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellants Hence, the present appeal.

5. Let us now give the facts in Civil Appeal No. 5677/94. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 27.8.93 of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in O.P. No. 9732 of 1990-H. The contesting respondents, who were the petitioners in the High Court, were working as Estate Clerks, otherwise known as Company Paid Staff (hereinafter referred to as ‘Company Paid Staff’), in the Office of the Official Liquidator, High Court of Kerala. It is not in dispute that the said Company Paid Staff were working in the Office of the Official Liquidator continuously and without any break for years together. They were appointed by the Official Liquidator pursuant to the orders of the High Court under Rules 308 and 309 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. It is also common gr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document