Civil Appeal No 3921 NL of 1987
From the Award dated 1551987 of the Industrial Tribunal No III
Delhi in Industrial Dispute No 157 of 1981312 of 1987
PN Gupta for the Appellants
RB Datar and Ranjit Kumar for the Respondents
The following order of the Court was delivered O R D E R Special leave granted
The appeal is heard
The appellant is the union of employees in the Delhi Municipal Corporation
Some of the members of the appellant union have been working as VaccinatorsImmunisors on daily wages under the Delhi Municipal Corporation for more than eight years whereas many others who have been regularly appointed and are doing same kind of work are being paid higher salary and allowances every month
Even though the Vaccinators Immunisors who have been working on daily wages have been working for a long number of years no action has been taken by the Delhi Municipal Corporation for regularising their services
In view of the disparity in the payment of wages and the neglect on the part of the Corporation regarding the regularisation of the services of the daily rated workmen there arose an industrial dispute and the dispute was referred by the competent authority for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal No 3 Delhi under a notification dated 2311
The question which was referred to the Tribunal was Whether the workmen mentioned in Annexure A  need to be regularised as Vaccinatorslmmunisors in the scale of Rs260 430 and if so from what date and what directions are necessary in this matter 176 After hearing the matter the Tribunal agreed with all the contentions of the appellants but it held that no relief could be granted to them and that they should approach either the High Court or the Supreme Court for that purpose
Accordingly the Tribunal passed an award nearly six years after the date of the reference that the workmen concerned were not entitled to be regularised as VaccinatorsImmunisors in the scale of Rs260 430
Aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal the appellant has filed this appeal by special leave
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we find that the Delhi Municipal Corporation has practically no tenable defence to the claim made by the workmen
There is no justification for the Corporation extracting the same amount of work from the workmen concerned on payment of daily wages at rates lower than the minimum salary which is being paid to other workmen who have been recruited regularly even though the workmen involved in this case have been working for a number of years
Nearly six years have elapsed from the date of the reference but without any change in the attitude of the Corporation
Following the decision of this Court in Daily Rated Casual Labour employed under P  T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch vs Union of India Ors
1987 2 SCALE page 844 and our decision in UP Income tax Department Contingent Paid Staff Welfare Association vs Union of India  Ors Writ Petition No 1870 of 1986 decided on December 4 1987 we direct the respondent Delhi Municipal Corporation to pay the Vaccinators Immunisors involved in this appeal wages at the rate equivalent to the minimum pay in the pay scale of regularly employed Vaccinators Immunisors without any increments with effect from the date of the reference ie 23111981
The workmen concerned are also entitled to the corresponding dearness allowance
We also direct the Delhi Municipal Corporation to prepare a scheme on a rational basis for absorbing as far as possible the workman involved in this case as regular VaccinatorsImmunisors
This order is made in substitution of the award passed by the Tribunal
The arrears of salary and allowance payable under this order shall be paid within four months
The scheme for absorption shall be prepared within six months and the process of absorption shall be completed within eight months from today
The appeal is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs
PSS Appeal allowed


Summary:
 A contract was entered into by the parties in 1970 71
The award was made by the Arbitrator in 1982
The award was challenged before the subordinate Judge who upheld the same
Appeal to the High Court against the order of the Subordinate Judge was dismissed
The petitioners moved this Court by special leave against the order of the High Court and contended inter alia that since a similar matter of unreasoned award had been referred by the Court to a Constitution Bench of the Court this petition for special leave be also similarly referred to the Constitution Bench
Dismissing the petition with a modification of the award the Court  HELD In the facts and circumstances of this peculiar case the matter is not referred to the Constitution Bench
147B It appears from the order of the High Court that the point of unreasoned award though taken in the petition of appeal was not pressed before the High Court
Further the Arbitrator had been appointed by the Court out of the panels submitted by the contesting parties
Also in the case of an allied contract in respect of another flat in the same building an award had been made and the same had been made the rule of the Court subject to the certain conditions
146G H The award is modified to the extent that the interest awarded from the commencement of the reference before the Arbitrator to the date of the award is set aside which is in consonance with the views expressed by this Court in Executive Engineer Irrigation Galimala and Ors
vs Abaaduta Jena  147C D