2011 Supreme(MP) 1326

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
Rajendra Menon, J.
Home Guard Sainik Evam Parivar Kalyan Sangh and others - Appellant
Versus
State of M.P.and another - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 10000-2010, Writ Petition (S) No. 8281-2011, 18526-2010
Decided On : 02-12-2011

The Home Guards organization, initially started as a voluntary organization, lost its voluntary characteristics with the passage of time and became a regular establishment assisting the regular police force of the State. Therefore, the Home Guards are entitled to be treated as regular employees of the State Government and are entitled to the benefits available to regular employees of the State Government, particularly in the Police Department.

Headnote:

The Home Guards organization, initially started as a voluntary organization, lost its voluntary characteristics with the passage of time and became a regular establishment assisting the regular police force of the State. The petitioners, who are Home Guards, are required to perform regular duties as are performed by members of the regular police staff in the State and, therefore, treating the petitioners to be regular employees, applying the principle of 'equal work for equal wages' and by declaring the action of the State Government in not doing so to be an arbitrary and an illegal decision, contrary to the mandate of Articles 14, 21 and 23 of the Constitution, the relief be granted.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are Home Guards, filed writ petitions seeking a declaration that they be declared as holders of "civil post" and treating them to be so, all consequential benefits be granted to them as is being granted to regular employees of the State Government, particularly in the Police Department. They also sought a direction to the respondents to frame rules and regulations governing conditions of service for the persons working in the Home Guards Organization, particularly with reference to pay Scale, allowances, increments, pensionary benefits and other service conditions.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the Home Guards organization is no more a voluntary organization and the nature of work performed by the Home Guards is the regular work performed by a regular Government Department. Therefore, they should be treated as a regular employee of the State Government.

Issues: 1. Whether the Home Guards organization is a voluntary organization or a regular establishment? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to be declared as holders of "civil post"? 3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefits available to regular employees of the State Government, particularly in the Police Department? 4. Whether the respondents are required to frame rules and regulations governing conditions of service for the persons working in the Home Guards Organization?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Home Guards organization is no more a voluntary organization and the nature of work performed by the Home Guards is the regular work performed by a regular Government Department. Therefore, they should be treated as a regular employee of the State Government. 2. The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to be declared as holders of "civil post". 3. The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits available to regular employees of the State Government, particularly in the Police Department. 4. The Court held that the respondents are required to frame rules and regulations governing conditions of service for the persons working in the Home Guards Organization.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petitions and directed the State Government to take note of the recommendations made by the State Human Rights Commission and formulate statutory rules and regulations for regulating the working of the Home Guards establishment. The Court also directed the State Government to grant salary to the petitioners at the minimum/basic of the pay prescribed for the lowest post i.e.... constable in the police department, without any running pay scale, allowances etc. The Court further directed the State Government to do away with the system of calling of duty and the employees shall be employed throughout the year subject to their being physically fit or otherwise entitled to work in accordance to law.