itions Nos
147 320 69 459 4335 443485 etc
Under Article 32 of the Constitution
For the Appearing Parties B Datta RishiKesh MK Rama murti MA
Krishnamurty
Anis Suhrawardy M section Gujaral SC
Maheshwari PP Singh C
V Subba Rao RN Poddar CP Pardey VR Verma R P Singh Indira Sawhney SC Patel Harbans Singh GN Chowdhary Narinder R D Uradhyay PK
Jain KR Nagaraja Shakil Ahmed Syed NS
Das Bahl K RP Pillai DGoburdhan C Malhotra SN
Chowdhary VK Pandit Manoj Saxena Madan Sharma GS
Narayan Ms Halida Khatoon K K Gupta C Agarwala h Satish Ms A Subhashini Sambandam and Pillai PN Gupta Mrs Jayashree Wad and Raju Ramachandran
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAIJ
Articles 41 and 42 of the Constitution notwithstanding there are certain grey areas where the rule of hire and fire a legacy of laissez faire even in Government employment still rules the roost
Casual labour employed on projects also known as projects casual labour  is one such segment of employment where one may serve for years and remain a daily rated worker without a weekly off without any security of service without the protection of equal pay for equal work
In short at the sweet will and mercy of the local 839 satraps
Even the formidable railwaymen s unions least cared for these helpless and hapless workmen
Suddenly a torrent of writ petitions and petitions for special leave awakened this Court to the plight of these workmen
In quick succession 48 writ petitions and 32 petitions for special leave flooded this Court
In each writ petition  SLP the grievance was that even though the workmen styled as project casual labour  had put in continuous service for years on end to wit ranging from 1974 till 1983 yet their services were terminated with impunity under the specious plea that the project on which they were employed has been wound np on its completion and their services were no more needed
No one is unaware of the fact that Railway Ministry has a perspective plan spreading over years say decades and projects are waiting in queue for execution and year these workmen were shunted out to use a cliche from the railway vocabulary without any chance of being re employed
Some of them rushed to the court and obtained interim relief
Some were not so fortunate
At one stage some of these petitions were set down for final hearing and the judgment was reserved
When some other similar matters came up Mr KG Bhagat the then learned Additional Solicitor General requested the Court not to render the judgment because he would take up the matter with the Railway Ministry to find a just and humane solution affecting the livelihood of these unfortunate workmen
As the future of lakhs of workmen going under the label of casual project labour was likely to be affected we repeatedly adjourned these matters to enable the Railway Ministry to work out a scientific scheme
Railway Ministry framed a Scheme and circulated the same amongst others to all the General Managers of Indian Railways including production units as per its circular No ENGII84CL41 dated June 1 1984
In the Scheme it was stated that all the General Managers were directed to implement the decision of the Railway Ministry by the target dates It was further stated that a detailed letter regarding group 5 1ii would follow
Such a letter was issued on June 25 1984
Thereafter these matters were set out for examining the fairness and justness of the Scheme and whether the Court would be in a position to dispose of these petitions in view of the Scheme
That is how these matters came up before us
The relevant portions of the Scheme read as under 840 51
As a result of such deliberations the Ministry of Railways have now decided in principle that casual labour employed on project also known as project casual labour  may be treated as temporary on completion of 360 days of continuous employment
The Ministry have decided further as under a These orders will cover i Casual labour on projects who are in service as on 1184 and ii Casual labour on projects who though not In service on 1184 had been in service on Railways earlier and had already completed the above prescribed period 360 days of continuous employment or will complete the said prescribed period of continuous employment on re engagement in future
A detailed letter regarding this group follows
b The decision should be implemented in phases according to the schedule given below Length of service Date from which Date by which ie iecontinuous may be treated decision should employment
as temporary be implemented i Those who have 111984 31121984 completed five yearsof service as on 1184 ii Those who have 111985 31121985 completed three years but less than five years of service as on 111984 iii Those who have 111986 31121986 ted 360 days but less than three years of service on 111984 841 iv Those who complete 111987 or 3131987 360 days after the date on which 111984 360 days are completed which ever is later
The Ministry would like to clarify here that casual labour on projects who have completed 180 days of continuous employment would continue to be entitled to the benefits now admissible to them so long as they fulfil the conditions in this regard till they become due for the benefits mentioned in the preceding sub paragraph
 By and large the scheme certainly is an improvement on the present situation though not wholly satisfactory
However the railway being the biggest employer and having regard to the nature of its work it would have to engage casual labour and therefore as a preliminary step towards realisation of the ideal enshrined in Articles 41 and 42 we propose to put our stamp of approval on the scheme with one major variation which we proceed to herein set out
The Scheme envisages that it would be applicable to casual labour on projects who were in service as on January 1 1984
The choice of this date does not commend to us for it is likely to introduce an invidious distinction between similarly situated persons and expose some workmen to arbitrary discrimination flowing from fortuitous court s order
To illustrate in some matters the court granted interim stay before the workmen could be retrenched while some other were not so fortunate
Those in respect of whom the court granted interim relief be staysuspension of the order of retrenchment they would be treated in service on 111984 while others who fail to obtain interim relief though similarly situated would be pushed down in the implementation of the Scheme
There is another area where discrimination is likely to rear its ugly head
These workmen come from the lowest grade of railway service
They can ill afford to rush to court
Their Federations have hardly been of any assistance
They had individually to collect money and rush to court which in case of some may be beyond their reach
Therefore some of the retrenched workmen failed to knock 842 at the doors of the court of justice because these doors do not open unless huge expenses are incurred
Choice in such a situation even without crystal gazing is between incurring expenses for a litigation with uncertain outcome and hunger from day to day
It is a Hobson s choice
Therefore those who could not come to the court need not be at a comparative disadvantage to those who rushed in here
If they are otherwise similarly situated they are entitled to similar treatment if not by anyone else at the hands of this Court
Burdened by all these relevant considerations and keeping in view all the aspects of the matter we would modify part 51 a i by modifying the date from 111984 to 111981
With this modification and consequent rescheduling in absorption from that date onward the Scheme framed by Railway Ministry is accepted and a direction is given that it must be implemented by re casting the stages consistent with the change in the date as herein directed
To avoid violation of article 14 the scientific and equitable way if implementing the scheme is for the Railway administration to prepare a list of project casual labour with reference to each division of each railway and then start absorbing those with the longest service
If in the process any adjustments are necessary the same must be done
In giving this direction we are considerably influenced by the statutory recognition of a principle well known in industrial jurisprudence that the men with longest service shall have priority over those who have joined later on
In other words the principle of last come first go or to reverse it first come last go as enunciated in Sec
25G of the has been accepted
We direct accordingly
All these writ petitions and special leave petitions shall stand disposed of consistent with the scheme as modified by this judgment and the directions herein given
The scheme as would stand modified by the directions here in given forms part of this judgment and a copy of it shall be annexed to this judgment
Learned counsel Shri Anis Suhrawardy has put in the maximum labour in making a very useful compilation
He must have spent days and months The compilation helped us the most 843 in dealing with the writ petitions and the special leave petitions and in ascertaining the proper principle
Such a compilation ought to have been prepared by the Railway administration
Therefore we direct the Union of India to pay Rs 5000 as and by way of costs to Shri Anis Suhrawardy advocate Supreme Court
MLA Petitions dismissed


Summary:
The petitioner workmen styled as Project Casual Labour  in these writ petitions and special leave petitions contended that even though they had put in continuous service for years their services were terminated on the ground that the project on which they were employed has been wound up on its completion and their services were no more needed
After the conclusion of the hearing in some of the matters the Railway Ministry framed a scheme to find a just and humane solution affecting the livelihood of the petitioner It provided that casual labour employed on projects may be treated as temporary on completion of 360 days of continuous employment
Disposing of the petitions  HELD 1
i By and large the scheme certainly is an improvement on the present situation though not wholly satisfactory
However the Railway being the biggest employer and having regard to the nature of its work it would have to engage casual labour and therefore as a preliminary step towards realisation of the ideal enshrined in Articles 41 and 42 this Court proposes to put its stamp of approval on the scheme with one major variation which is herein set out
841D 1
ii The scheme envisages that it would be applicable to casual labour on projects who were In service as on January 1 1984
The choice of this date does not commend for it is likely to introduce an invidious distinction between similarly situated persons and expose some workmen to arbitrary discrimination flowing from fortuitous court s order since in some matters the court granted interim stay before the workmen could be retrenched while some other were not so fortunate
Those in respect of when the Court granted interim relief by stay suspension of the order of retrenchment they would be treated in service on l l 1981 while others who fail to obtain interim rel if though similarly situated 838 would be pushed down in the implementation of the scheme
Therefore those who could not come to the Court need not be at a comparative disadvantage to those who rushed in here
If they are otherwise similarly situated they are entitled to similar treatment
Keeping in view all the aspects of the matter the Court modifies part 51 a i of the scheme by modifying the date from 111984 to 11
With this modification and consequent rescheduling in absorption from that date onward the scheme framed by Railway Ministry is accepted and a direction is given that it must be implemented by re casting the stages consistent with the change in the date as herein directed
841E G 842B C 2 To avoid violation of article 14 the scientific and equitable way of implementing the scheme is for the Railway administration to prepare a list of project casual labour with reference to each division OF each railway and then start absorbing those with the longest service
If in the process any adjustments are necessary the same must be done
In giving this direction the court is considerably influenced by the statutory recognition of the principle of last come first go or to reverse it first come last go as enunciated in s25G of the 
842D F