http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 9182  of  1996

PETITIONER: FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS UNION

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       02/02/2001

BENCH: S. Rajendra Babu & Shivaraj V. Patil.

JUDGMENT:

L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J RAJENDRA BABU,  J. :

   This  Court  by an order made on 16.7.1996  disposed  of Civil  Appeal No.  9182 of 1996 giving certain directions in regard  to  reinstatement  of  the   workmen  who  had  been retrenched  for  identification  and reinstatement  and  for certain  incidental  reliefs.   Inasmuch as  the  litigation between  the parties is one of several decades, the  benefit of  reinstatement  as  directed by this Court could  not  be given  to some of the employees who had died between 1975 to 1996.  Therefore, an application I.A.  No.  5 has been filed in Civil Appeal No.  9182 of 1996 which has been disposed of earlier.   The  claim  made in this I.A.  is  basically  for appointment  and posting of kith and kin of deceased workmen on  the  basis  of identification of the said kith  and  kin under  terms  and  conditions set out by this Court  in  the order  referred  to  by  us.  When the matter  came  up  for consideration  on 17.2.1998 this Court noticed that the only prayer  that  survives  for   consideration  is  the  prayer relating  to  appointment  of kith and kin of  the  deceased workmen  and this Court gave certain directions in regard to furnishing   the   latest  list  of   claimants   for   such appointment.   Again  on 25.2.2000 when this matter came  up for  consideration  this  Court directed the  applicants  to prepare  two lists out of the main general list (which is at page No.  276 of the paper book) and the first list shall be of those persons who have died between 1975 and 6.8.1989 and second  list  shall be of those persons who have died on  or after  7.8.1989 till 1996.  On furnishing of such lists, the Food  Corporation  of India was directed to  scrutinise  the lists  of  those persons who have died on or after  7.8.1989 and  who  would have got benefit of the order of this  Court dated  16.7.1996, but for their unfortunate death after 1989 and  before  1996 and to consider the claim of the kith  and kin of the deceased workman as per the rules and regulations and  policy decision dated 7.8.1989 as subsequently modified by two other policy decisions.  So far as the first list was concerned,  it  is  made  clear that order  will  be  passed thereafter.  In regard to second list furnished an affidavit has been filed on 7.8.2000.  The stand of the respondents is that the policy changed after 7.8.1989 and, therefore, there

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

was  necessity for this Court to give directions as  regards those persons who have died prior to 7.8.1989.  The stand of the  respondents is that the circular dated 7.8.1989 applies only  to DPS workers who had died in harness and as such  it is  imperative  that  the  said  workman  should  have  been actually  working when he died but the applicability of  the circular  dated 7.8.1989 and, therefore, contended that  the cases  of  persons who were not actually reinstated and  who died  prior  to  reinstatement   cannot  be  considered  for appointment  on  compassionate grounds.  This stand  of  the respondent   is   plainly   unacceptable   because   legally retrenched  workmen  were  directed to be but had  not  been though  entitled to be reinstated.  Therefore, what is to be considered  is  the  cases  of those persons  who  had  been directed  to be reinstated and have not been reinstated  and such  persons  must be deemed to be in service and  died  in harness  for the purpose of this order and applicability  of the  circular  dated 7.8.1989.  If this aspect is  borne  in mind, the same directions that have been given by this Court on  25.2.2000 by which the other part of the I.A.  had  been disposed  of  shall  also  be  applicable.   Though  several aspects  have been addressed before us, it is not  necessary to  consider  them  in these proceedings because  the  other directions  issued by this Court in regard to identification of  the  workmen or their kith and kin and applicability  of the circulars will be the same.  So far as those persons who had  died  prior to 7.8.1989 are concerned,  the  directions shall  be  the  same except in regard to the change  in  the policy that has taken place subsequent to that date.

   Therefore,  the  I.A.   shall stand disposed of  in  the terms as aforesaid.