JUDGMENT

ANIL R. DAVE, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. At the request of the learned counsel, the appeal was finally heard.

3. Being aggrieved by Judgment and Order dated 26th November, 2007 passed in Writ Petition No. 41579/2002 by the High Court of Madras, this appeal has been filed by Union of India and its officers, who were respondents in the writ petition.

4. The present respondents were petitioners in the petition before the High Court of Madras and, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they have been described as petitioners whereas the appellants before this Court were respondents in the High Court and, therefore, they have been described as respondents herein below.

5. The facts giving rise to the present litigation in a nut-shell is as under:-

6. The petitioners were working on part time basis in Civilian Bandsmen Team at Air Force Station, Tambaram. They were paid remuneration on daily wages basis and certain amount was paid to them per month as an incentive in addition to certain allowances for haircut, uniform washing etc. and they were also provided lunch or breakfast on certain days. Moreover, whenever they were asked to play music at any function organised by civilians, 20% of the amount received by the respondent-authorities from the civilians was paid to the team which had played music.

7. Some of the petitioners were engaged in 1982 whereas some were engaged in 1992. As they were not being paid a regular pay scale, they had made representations on 22nd May, 2001 and 21st June, 2001. The said representations had been rejected on 20th September, 2001 and, therefore, the petitioners had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing an Original Application No. 1162/2001 praying for an order to the effect that the respondents be directed to absorb them in one of the Group `D' Posts. The respondent-authorities had filed their reply before the Tribunal stating that the petitioners were not entitled to regularization or appointment to Group `D' posts, for the reason that there was no sanctioned post and the petitioners were paid from Non-Public Fund and there was neither any provision for regularization nor there was any sanctioned post to which they could be appointed. Ultimately, after considering the facts of the case and upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the Tribunal rejected the application by an order dated 10th June, 2002. The Tribunal had observed in its order rejecting the application that the petitioners were not entitled to regularization because the petitioners had not been appointed against any sanctioned post and it was also observed that the petitioners were daily-wagers who were paid Rs. 40 per day and Rs. 200/- per month as an incentive in addition to certain other perquisites. It was also observed that no material was placed before the Tribunal to show that the petitioners were performing duties which were similar to those performed by Bandsmen working in the Air Force.

8. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioners had preferred Writ Petition No. 41579/2002 which has been referred to hereinabove and which has been allowed by the High Court of Madras. The High Court found that the respondent-Authorities were acting in an unfair manner by giving only 20% of the charges received from private civilians when the petitioners were directed to play their instruments in functions organised by private citizens. Moreover, the High Court also found it unjust to continue the petitioners as daily wagers for such a long period without giving them regular pay-scale. The High Court, therefore, quashed and set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and gave directions to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners.

9. Learned Additional Solicitor General, Shri Mohan Parasaran, appearing for the appellants, who are original respondents, submitted that the impugned order is unjust and illegal and deserves to be quashed and set aside. He mainly s