1 LPA No. 249 of 2009 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH. *** LPA No. 249 of 2009 Date of Decision: February 24, 2010. *** Jagdish Mehto-III and others Vs. Ram Rattan and others. *** LPA No. 83 of 2009. *** Food Corporation of India Vs. Ram Rattan and others. *** CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mukul Mudgal, Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh. *** 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** Present: Shri Rajiv Atma Ram, Sr.Advocate, with Shri Arjun Partap Atma Ram, Advocate, and Shri Saurabh Arora, Advocate in LPA No.249 of 2009. Shri K.K.Gupta, Advocate, for petitioners in LPA No. 83 of 2009 and respondents 2 to 4 in LPA No. 249 of 2009. Shri Puneet Jindal, Advocate, for respondents No. 9 to 12. Shri Puneet Gupta, Advocate. *** Mukul Mudgal, CJ (Oral) 1. These are two appeals- one by the affected workmen who were claiming regularization in the Food Corporation of India and were regularized pursuant to the report dated 28.4.1994 submitted by one man committee headed by Shri R.K.Ranga, IAS, Sr. Regional Manager, Haryana Region, Food Corporation of India, Chandigarh and the second appeal is by the Food Corporation of 2 LPA No. 249 of 2009 India itself challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated January 08, 2009 directing it to redecide, inter se seniority, of contract labour pertaining to Karnal Depot of Food Corporation of India. 2. The indisputable facts of the case culled out by the learned Single Judge read as follows:- ''The background of the case is that the petitioners had been working in the depots of FCI including FSD and Hameda Complex at Karnal till April 1994 for the last 20 years. They were employed by the FCI through the agency of Handling and Transport Contractors (HTC) for loading, unloading, stacking, restaking, weighment of food-grains and allied activities. The petitioners claim that they are the members of Bharatiya Khadya Nigam Mazdoor Sangh, HQ, Lucknow. The petitioners have been all through agitating for abolition of Contract Labour System which was prevalent in the F.C.I. Godowns. They were regulated under the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The concerned Governments and the Food Corporation of India were not observing the specific provisions of the Act in strict sense which forced the petitioners to file a writ petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which came to be allowed vide judgment reported as F.C.I. Workers Union Versus Food Corporation of India and others, AIR 1985 S.C. 488. As per the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Haryana Government formed a committee under Section 5 of the Act. On consideration of the report of the Committee so constituted by the Haryana Government the Contract Labour System was abolished in 22 3 LPA No. 249 of 2009 depots of F.C.I. Vide notification dated 29.11.1985. The said notification whereby the employment of labour through agency of contractor was prohibited by Haryana Government was challenged by the FCI through a writ petition in this Court. The said writ petition came to be dismissed and thereafter the Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the FCI also met the same fate. The FCI thereafter preferred a Special Leave Petition which was also dismissed on 24.10.1990 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court''. 3. One of the issues debated before the learned Single Judge was that the decision of the FCI for departmentalization of the contract labour was only with effect from 1.1.1991. The petitioners before the learned Single Judge contended that since the contract labour was prohibited in the year 1985, the contract labour should be departmentalized from the date of notification. A Committee was constituted headed by Mr. Dalela to consider the case set up by the writ petitioners -respondents in the present appeal. The Committee headed by Mr. Dalela recommended for departmentalization of the services of the petitioners and apart from the petitioners, 235 more persons were recommended for appointments. The recommendations made by Dalela Committee were not implemented and instead another Committee was formed. It is alleged that this Committee of the officers of the F.C.I's choice was constituted to defeat the claim of the petitioners. One of the averments of the writ petitioners before the learned Single Judge was that the FCI wanted to departmentalize the services of the members of the workmen Union only and not on individual case basis, without taking into consideration the Rules, Regulations and the Guide-lines contained in the 4 LPA No. 249 of 2009 notification dated 29.11.1985. 4. The respondents then constituted another Committee in December, 1991 headed by Shri S.K.Chopra to identify, prepare and recommend the seniority list on the basis of which services of the workmen could be departmentalized. That Committee invited applications on specified forms from all the persons who were eligible on or before 1.1.1991, which was the date fixed for considering the eligibility of the persons. The petitioners along with others submitted their applications and claims on the prescribed Performa. On the basis of the guidelines of the Board, the Committee submitted its report dated 26.4.1993 and the names of the petitioners were included in the said report. Again the said report was not implemented which led to the filing of CWP No. 7361 of 1993 bearing caption Ram Rattan and others Versus FCI and others, praying for the implementation of the Chopra Committee's Report. In response to that writ petition, the Food Corporation of India contended that the process for the implementation of the Chopra Committee Report was in progress but as some representations and legal notices from the FCI workers Union raising certain objections against the report of Chopra Committee, were received, the same were being considered. The said writ petition was decided by this Court vide order dated 17.8.1993. On an application filed by the parties, the said order dated 17.8.1993 was modified vide order dated 21.9.1993, which reads as under:- '' After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Haryana Region, Sector 17, Chandigarh (respondent No.2) to finalize the inter se seniority of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons by considering their representation and finalize the same within a period of three months 5 LPA No. 249 of 2009 from today. As a necessary consequence of our order, the parties have agreed to withdraw all the pending litigation. It is, however, clarified that while considering the representations, if any, and finalizing the seniority, the authorities of FCI shall take into consideration the seniority list Annexure P-3 with the writ petition. It is also clarified that the C.M. No. 7556 of 1993 in CWP No. 7361 of 1993. Parties before us shall withdraw all the pending litigation with regard to the identification of the workers/contract labour''. Sd/- M.R.Agnihotri Sd/- R.S.Mongia, JJ''. 5. This order was clarified vide order dated 4.2.1994, which reads as follows:- '' After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the reply filed by the F.C.I., it is hereby clarified that the order dated 23.12.1993 by which the time granted to finalize the inter se seniority was extended upto 30.4.1993 does not mean that the FCI is to form new committee to finalize the inter se seniority of the petitioners as per orders dated 21.9.1993. It is the S.R.M., FCI, Haryana Region, who is to himself finalize the inter se seniority as per above said order dated 21.9.1993. The prayer for reducing the period, as extended. Sd/- R.S.Mongia, Sd/- N.K.Kapoor, JJ 6. The main grievance contained in the writ petition filed before the learned Single Judge was to the effect that pursuant to 6 LPA No. 249 of 2009 order dated 4.02.1994 Shri R.K.Ranga the then Senior Regional Manager,FCI, Haryana Region proceeded to decide the matter and scrapped the report of the Chopra Committee altogether. The Ranga Committee indeed decided the issue of inter se seniority without taking into account the record pertaining to deduction of EPF and gate entry register etc. 7. Learned Single Judge vide his order dated 8.1.2009 set aside the report dated 29.4.1994 leading to the filing of the present LPAs both by certain section of workers as well as by the Food Corporation of India. 8. Before we deal with the pleas raised by learned counsel for the appellants, the operative part of the judgment of the learned Single Judge needs to be reproduced, which reads as under:- '' The matter has been lingering since long and the petitioners are waiting for the determination of their seniority on the basis of which their rights would be crystallized. This position cannot be allowed to be kept pending for all times to come and even the Division Bench of this Court while deciding LPA No. 319 of 1998 and LPA No. 350 of 1998 had indicated that the matter needs to be resolved. Keeping the same in view and in the light of the fact that this writ petition has been pending in this Court since 1994, it would be appropriate that Shri R.P.Bajaj, District & Sessions Judge (Retd) H.No. 5460, Sector 38 West, Chandigarh be appointed as a one man Committee to examine all the relevant records produced before the Chopra Committee and the report of the Ranga Committee in the light of the directions of this Court in its order dated 21.9.1993 and 4.2.1994 and then to redetermine the seniority 7 LPA No. 249 of 2009 of the workers who were working at FCI Karnal Depot. Let the said exercise be completed within a period of four months from today. Appropriate steps in accordance with law will be taken in pursuance to the seniority fixed by Shri R.P.Bajaj, within a period of one month thereafter''. 9. The learned Single Judge while setting aside the report of the Ranga Committee inter alia noticed the following flaws and reached to the following conclusions:- a) The Senior Regional Manager, FCI Haryana Region was to finalize the inter se seniority of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons as per order dated 4.2.1994. The Committee also invited fresh material for finalization of the seniority list, had assigned the work to the Regional Computer Centre, Chandigarh. This was held to be beyond the directions given by the High Court. b) That the appointment letters were issued on 28.4.1994 and the Ranga Committee Report was submitted on 29.4.1994. This itself was held by the learned Single Judge to disregard the Ranga's Committee report. c) That amount of Rs.77,170/- which was the Employees' Provident Fund for the financial year 1980-81, 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1989-90 which were deposited in the Employees Provident Fund Organization on behalf of the petitioners, should have been taken into consideration but were ignored by the Ranga Committee. 10.Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Sr.Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant workmen and Mr. K.K.,Gupta appearing on behalf of 8 LPA No. 249 of 2009 the FCI challenged the findings of the learned Single Judge. In our view, the learned Single Judge has not made any observation on the merits of the case but merely found flaws in the report of Ranga Committee and since it has not been pointed out how these findings by the learned Single Judge are flawed, we cannot interfere with the Single Judge's judgment. 11. Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram has contested the date of departmentalization of the labour on the ground that the report was dated 28.4.1994 and not 29.4.1994 as held by the learned Single Judge and the appointment letters were also issued on 28.4.1994. Even if it is accepted that the report was dated 28.4.1994 it is indeed a pleasant surprise for this Court that immediately on the same date, appointment letters were issued. We are also not unmindful of the fact that no record as directed by the learned Single Judge has been produced before Shri R.P.Bajaj, District &Sessions Judge (Retd.), appointed by this Court inspite of there being no interim order by the Division Bench in this appeal. In our view this itself is another telling circumstance which demonstrate the attitude of the F.C.I. Accordingly, we find no merit in these appeals and are accordingly dismissed. 12. During the course of hearing, it is not disputed that the parameters for the purpose set up in communication Annexure P-8 shall also be taken into account. 13. So far as flaws pointed out by the counsel in the judgment of the learned Single Judge are concerned, the perusal of the record shows that EPF Organization had returned the Employees Provident Fund by the workers only on the ground that 9 LPA No. 249 of 2009 the same had not been verified by an official of the FCI and the same was to be resubmitted after verification by the FCI. Therefore, inaction on the part of the FCI could not cause any prejudice to the rights of the writ petitioners. The gate entry registers instead of being rejected out-right ought to, have been verified with regard to the veracity thereof. These facts shall be taken into consideration by Shri R.P.Bajaj while examining the matter. We have also noticed that the issue has not been resolved for long because the F.C.I. has not been implementing the reports of the Committees set up by it. This has clearly led to avoidable delays in resolving the issues involved in this appeal. 14. Shri R.P.Bajaj, will also, while considering the representations as per directions of the learned Single Judge, take into account the Dalela, Chopra and Ranga Committees' reports. Since the matter remained pending in this court, though without any interim order, Shri R.P.Bajaj shall continue functioning if so desired by him even at Karnal and the FCI will provide all the facilities befitting his status. The entire records as directed by the learned Single Judge will be produced before Shri R.P.Bajaj by the FCI on or before March 25, 2011. Within four months from 25th March 2010 Shri R.P.Bajaj is directed to submit his report after hearing one representative from both the sides, and on the basis of existing material on the records to the FCI not later than 7.7.2010. The rest of the directions given by the learned Single Judge shall stand unaltered and shall be implemented within the time schedule fixed by this Court. 15. Keeping in view the passage of time and the escalation in prices and the large extent of work involved, we increase the fee 10 LPA No. 249 of 2009 of Shri R.P.Bajaj to Rs. 1.50 lacs and Rs.45,000/- for the stenographer's remuneration. 16 Except for the above modification, both the appeals are dismissed. No costs. (Mukul Mudgal) Chief Justice ( Jasbir Singh) Judge February 24, 2010 Malik 11 LPA No. 249 of 2009 CR No. 4234 of 2008. *** Present: Shri Amarjit Markan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Vikas Chatrath, Advocate, for the respondent. *** At the request of counsel for the petitioner, list again on March 04, 2010. (Mukul Mudgal) Chief Justice (Jasbir Singh) February 24, 2010 Judge Malik