SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(SC) 1352

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN-UDDIN AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.
Union of India (Railway Board) and others, Appellants
Versus
J. V. Subhaiah and others etc. etc., Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 12148 with 12149 and 12150 of 1995 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 14446 with 24287 and 28523 of 1995),
D/- 15-12-1995.

Advocates:
ARVIND SHARMA, D.PRAKASH REDDY, Guntur Prabhakar, K.Madhava Reddy, K.T.S.Tulsi, N.N.GOSWAMY, RAMAMURTHI, VASIM A.QADRI, VIKAS PAHVA

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 - Factories Act - Section 46 - Promotion - Payment of salary - Respondents were admittedly appointed in Railway Employees Consumer Co operative Stores at Rajahmundry South Central Railway - They filed different - Before Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench seeking declaration that they are regular Railway employees in Class posts and entitled to be paid regular salary for continuous service from date respective appointments in Societies and also consequential promotion increments and payment of arrears of salary – Held, View of above discussion and in view legal setting referred to hereinbefore court are considered view that Bench had not laid down any law except approving reasoning and conclusion reached by Madras Bench of CAT - Madras Bench had merely referred to provisions in Manual and proceeded on premise that they gave rise to legal base to treat employees of Stores as Railway employees - Reasoning is wholly illegal and unsustainable for reasons stated above - Principle equality enshrined Article Constitution as contended for respondents does not apply since court have already held that order of CAT Madras Bench is clearly unsustainable in law and illegal which can never form basis to hold that other employees are invidiously discriminated offending Article - Employees covered b order of Madras Bench may be dealt with by Railway Administration appropriately but that could not form foundation plead discrimination violating Article Constitution – Court therefore have no hesitation to hold that officers employees and servants appointed by Railway Co operative Stores Societies cannot be treated on par with Railway servants under paragraph Railway Establishment Code nor they can be given parity of status promotions scales of pay increments - Ordered by CAT Hyderabad Bench - Appeal allowed

Judgement

RAMASWAMY, J.:- Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.

2. The respondents were admittedly appointed in Railway Employees Consumer Co-operative Stores at Rajahmundry, Visashakapatnam, Vijianagaram and Dharmavaram in Sourth-Central Railway. They filed different O.As. before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Hyderabad Bench seeking declaration that they are "regular Railway employees in Class III posts" and entitled to be paid regular salary for continuous service from the date of the respective appointments in the Societies and also consequential promotion, increments and payment of arrears of salary. The CAT, Hyderabad Bench following the decision of the Madras Bench delivered on June 29, 1990 in O.A. No.305/88 allowed O.As. and gave the directions for grant of the reliefs referred to earlier but payment of salary was directed to be made from the date on which respective applications were filed. By the time the present Special Leave Petitions came to be filed, a two Judge Bench of this Court by order dated September 7, 1994 made in C.A. No.2932/91 confirmed the order of the CAT, Madras Bench but the review petition was pending. When these appeals had come up for hearing on October 16, 1995 it was pointed out to another Bench by the Additional Solicitor General that despite the dismissal the matter required examination and for that reason notice was already issued in another case, viz. C.A All the matters were accordingly tagged together. After the dismissal of the review petition a two Judge Bench by order dated November 13, 1995 referred the matter to this Bench. Thus these appeals by special leave.

3. The admitted facts are that the respondents were appointed by the respective Railway Co-operative Stores registered under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 as amended from time to time. The Co-operative Stores were organised by the Railway Administration as social welfare measure to inculcate thrift and co-operative spirit in the management of the socieites, distribution of essential commodities and lending of credit facilities etc. to the members of the societies. Under the bye-laws, respective societies consist of serving members of the Railway Administration at the respective places. Normally these socieities are formed at railway junctions. They are organised under the instructions issued by the Railway Administration in the Railway Establishment Manual (non-statutory orders). Working of the socieities are supervised by the welfare officers appointed by the Railway Administration. It is in dispute as to whether salaries to welfare officers are paid by the socieites concerned or by the Railway Administration but that is not material for disposal of these appeals. It is also not in dispute that one third of the members of the socieities are nominated by the Railway Administration.

4. Shri Tulsi, learned Additional Solicitor, General contended, on the facts, that Co-operative Stores registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, a State Act and the articles of association or the bye-laws of the socieites are sanctioned by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies (for short, "The Registrar") of the concerned State appointed by the State Government under the respective State Acts. The constitution of the socieities is regulated and registered under the State Act. Appropriate law, rules and bye-laws provide that the General Body of the society periodically elects the members of the committee which in turn elects the President or general body itself elects the President, for a specified term. The President and the committee, as the case may be, is empowered to appoint the officers, employees and servants of the Stores according to its bye-laws. The Registrar under the respective Acts, has supervision and control over the working of the societies and its employees. In case of dispute between the society and its members or the society and its officers or employees, the same is resolved by



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top