Judgment

RANGANATH MISRA, J.:- The petitioner in each of these applications under Art. 32 of the Constitution is a workman engaged on terms of casual labour for periods varying between 10 and 16 years in the Construction Department of the Signal Unit in the Northern Railway. All the writ petitions having been disposed of by a common judgment as quesions of law and fact involved therein are similar.

2. The petitioners alleged that notwithstanding the fact that each of them has put in continuous service for quite a long period, the Railway Administration, respondent herein, has not treated them as temporary servants and has applied discriminatory rates of wages. They have asked for a direction to treat the petitioners at par with maintenance workers and to declare that they are entitled to equal pay for equal work and have asked for their absorption in the regular cadre in the permanent category as per the circulars issued by the respondents. A number of documents and circulars issued by the Administration have been produced in support of their claim.

3. The Senior Signal & Telecom Engineer (Power Signalling) has filed a counter-affidavit on behalf of the respondents challenging the claim of the petitioners. According to the respondents five out of the forty-four petitioners in this group of writ petitions had undergone medical examination and were granted temporary status as Khallasis. One of them has been directed to be absorbed against a permanent vacancy in the open line; five others have refused to go to the open line for permanent absorption. He further averred that though prior to the issue of the Railway Boards directions on Jan., 1, 1984, project casual labourers were not entitled to all the privileges like House Rent Allowance, City Compensatory Allowance, Casual Leave, Increment, etc., they are now entitled to all the privileges as applicable to open line temporary railway servants after attaining temporary status. In Para 23 of the counter-affidavit, it has been specifically pleaded that as per the extant rules, temporary status will first be given in the cadre of Khallasi and then promotion to skilled category after conducting the trade-test is admissible A further detailed counter-affidavit has again been filed by another Senior Signal & Telecom Engineer, wherein along with the affidavit particulars of service of each of the petitioners have been provided. Petitioners have filed a Rejoinder.

4. At the hearing of the applications, counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Additional Solicitor General were given full opportunity of placing their arguments and documents. In addition, they have also furnished written submissions.

5. It is stated on behalf of the Administration that out of forty-four petitioners sixteen have now been empanelled and of them five have been given temporary appointments; eleven are said to have refused to join and seventeen are still continuing with temporary status. Learned Additional Solicitor General states that petitioners are project employees and do not belong to the open line. According to him employees in the open line acquire temporary status on completion of 120 days of service as against 130 days which was the previous requirement. That status is acquired on completion of 360 days by casual labour in Project Works as provided in the scheme formulated under orders of this Court, though such status were acquirable by project casual labourers on completion of 180 days of continuous employment previously. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the definition of Project which means : "a project should be taken as construction of new lines, major projects, restoration of dismantled lines and major important open line works, line doubling, widening of tunnels etc., which are completed within a definite time limit."

6. Admittedly the petitioners have put in more than 360 days of service. Though counsel for the petitioners had pointed out that the Administration was re