http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: HINDUSTAN MACHINE TOOLS & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: M.RANGAREDDY & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       29/09/2000

BENCH: S.Rajendra Babu, D.P.Mohapatra

JUDGMENT:

L.....I.........T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J

     D.P.Mohapatra.  J.

     The   Hindustan  Machines   Tools  Ltd.   (hereinafter referred   to   as   ’HMT    Ltd.’)   represented   by   its Chairman-cum-Managing  Director at Bangalore and the Ceneral Manager  and the Joint General Manager (Personnel  Incharge) at Bali Nagar, Hyderabad have filed these appeals by special leave  challenging the judgment dated 9th Nov.  1995 of  the Single  Judge  of the A.P.  High Court in Writ Petition  No. 3425  of  1995 which was confirmed in appeal by  a  Division Bench  of  that Court by its Order dated 28th Dec.  1995  in Writ Appeal No.  1710 of 1995.

     HMT  Ltd.  is a Public Sector Undertaking of the Govt. of  India  which as described by the appellants,  has  grown into  a multi-unit, multi-product, multi-technology  Company having  four  business  groups and  20  manufacturing  units spread  over  ten  different  States in  the  country.   The Company engages casual workers on daily rate basis depending upon the need and exigencies of work.  Forty two such casual workers  engaged  in  the unit of the Company  at  Hyderabad filed  the  Writ Petition with a prayer to issue a  Writ  or Order  or  Direction  in the nature of a  Writ  of  Mandamus directing  the  respondents to regularise their services  in their  respective  posts  from  the   date  of  the  initial appointment  with all consequential benefits forthwith.  The appellants were arrayed as respondents in the Writ Petition.

     The writ petitioners alleged inter alia that they have been  working  as helpers and skilled workers  in  different departments of the Company for long periods of 3 to 10 years continuously.   Their engagement has been treated as  casual labour  on  daily wage basis.  Some of them  have  undergone training  course  (I.T.I.) as apprentice under the  Company. On successful completion of the said training the incumbents were  given temporary appointments, which continued till the date  of filing of the writ petition.  The writ  petitioners further alleged that though they had been discharging duties similar  to those of regular employees of the Company,  they were  denied  the benefit of regularisation of  service  and other service benefits on that basis.  Under such compelling circumstances  the  casual workers filed the  writ  petition seeking  the  reliefs noted above.  During pendency  of  the writ petition, considering the application filed by the writ petitioners  seeking  interim relief, the High Court  passed

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

the  order  for maintenance of status quo as on the date  of the  order to ensure continuance of the writ petitioners  in service.

     The  respondents  in  the writ  petition  refuted  the allegations  made therein.  The gist of the case pleaded  by them  was  that  it is necessary for the Company  to  engage casual  workers  to  cope with the  situation  arising  from absence of regular workers.  Engagement of casual workers in such  circumstances becomes necessary for continuity of  the production  line  in the units.  Engagement of such  workers depends  on  the  necessity  on  a  particular  day  and  no assurance  of  engagement can be given to any casual  worker for  continuous engagement over a period.  The further  case pleaded  by  the  company  was that  recruitment  of  casual workers  is  not according to rules for recruitment when  is followed  in  the  case of regular workmen.   Therefore,  no comparison  can be made between the two groups, namely,  the casual  workers and the regular workmen of the Company.  The learned  single  Judge  of  the High  Court  considered  the materials  produced  by  the  parties in  support  of  their respective cases and examined the matter in the light of the decisions  of  this Court in the case of State of Haryana  & Ors.   Vs.   Piara Singh & Ors.  1992(4) SCC 118 = AIR  1992 Supreme  Court  2130 and in the case of Niadar &  Anr.   Vs. Delhi  Administration  and Anr.  1992(4) SCC 112  and  other decisions  of  the  High  Court and  disposed  of  the  writ petition by passing the following Order :

     "I)  That the respondent Company is directed to evolve a  scheme  of  absorbing  the petitioners  herein  who  have completed more than 5 years of continuous service with their establishment  within a period of 6 months from the date  of receipt of this order.

     ii)  That the preference may be given to the employees (some  of  the petitioners herein), who have  completed  ITI training  and  the  Apprenticeship   with  the   respondents Company;  AND

     iii)  That  respondents  are directed  to  absorb  the petitioners herein, who also completed 5 years of continuous service with their establishment.  The appointments shall be made strictly according to seniority "

     Feeling aggrieved by the judgment order of the learned single  Judge,  the appellants filed the Writ Appeal,  which was  dismissed  by the Division Bench by passing  a  cryptic order, which reads as follows:

     "Heard  learned counsel for the appellant and  learned counsel for the writ petitioner respondent.@@                 JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ

     Direction  to  frame  a  scheme   to  absorb  who  are possessing higher qualifications and who are eligible as per the  scheme in respect of casual labour who have put in five years  or  more of continuous service in our opinion, is  in with  the  scheme  under  Articles  14 and  16  (1)  of  the Constitution of India, The Appeal is accordingly dismissed."

     The main thrust of the argument of Shri A.T.M.Sampath, learned  counsel  appearing for the appellants was that  the Company  being  burdened  with  heavy  accumulated  loss  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

several   crores  of  rupees   has  formulated  a  voluntary retirement scheme for its workmen, in such a situation it is not  possible  for  the  appellants to frame  a  scheme  for absorption  of the writ petitioners (respondents herein)  as regular employees of the Company.

     Percontra,   Shri  Nageshwara   Rao  learned   counsel appearing  for  the respondent-workers contended that  these workmen  have  been  rendering service to  the  Company  for almost 10 years on daily wage basis without any job security or  service  benefit and it is not a reasonable attitude  of the  Company,  a  public sector undertaking of  the  central Govt.   to  express  reluctance to even frame a  scheme  for absorption  of  these contract workers in the  regular  work force of the Company particularly when the unit in which the workers  are engaged is continuing.  According to Shri  Rao, the  very  fact  that  the   respondent  workers  have  been continuously rendinging service in the Company over a decade or  more  shows  that  the work entrusted to them  is  of  a permanent  nature  and  their services cannot  be  dispensed with.

     We have carefully considered the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties.  This Court, in the case of State  of  Haryana & Ors.  Vs.  Piara Singh & Ors.   (supra) considered  the  question  of   regularisation  of  ad  hoc, work-charged  employees  and  casual labour.   Therein  this Court  observed:   " So far as the work charged  employees and  casual  labour  are  concerned the effort  must  be  to regularise  them as far as possible and as early as possible subject  to  their  fulfilling the  qualifications  if  any, prescribed  for the post and subject also to availability of work.   If a casual labourer is continued for a fairly  long spell  say two or three years - a presumption may arise that there  is  regular  need  for   his  services.   In  such  a situation, it becomes obligatory for the concerned authority to  examine  the feasibility of his  regularisation.   While doing so, the authorities ought to adopt a positive approach coupled  with  an  empathy  for the  person.   As  has  been repeatedly  stressed  by  this court security of  tenure  is necessary  for an employee to give his bens to the job .  In this  behalf,  we  do commend the orders of  the  Govt.   of Haryana  (contained  in  its letter  dated  6.4.90  referred hereinbefore)  both in relation to work-charged employees as well as casual labour."

     The  question  of  regularisation   of  casual  labour specifically  came up for consideration before this Court in the case of Raj Narain Prasad & Ors.  Etc.  etc.  vs.  State of  U.P.  & Ors.  etc.etc.  1998 (8) SCC 473, in which  this Court, referring to the case of State of Haryana & Ors.  vs. Plara Singh & Ors.  (supra), made the following observation:

     ".   To put it differently, therefore, the State  has prepared  a  regularisation  scheme so far  as  work-charged employees  are concerned but has expressed its inability  to prepare   any   such   scheme  for   daily-rated/muster-roll employees.  We have carefully perused the proposed scheme in regard  to work-charged employees and we felt that in clause ’D’  which talks of regularisation as per vacancies  arising in  regular  posts  on the establishment a  modification  is necessary  in  that  there should be a review of  the  cadre strength from year to year and based on the past requirement and continuity of work charged employees, the cadre strength should  be  increased  by a certain percentage of  the  work

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

charged  employees working over a period of time that may be fixed  by  the Govt.  so that the pace of regularisation  is accelerated  and  is not the same as obtaining in the  past. For  example,  if  100   work-charged  employees  have  been required  throughout a period of time it could reasonably be estimated  that  even  if shedding takes  place,  a  certain percentage  of  those employees would certainly be  retained and a part of them could be absorbed by increasing the cadre strength to that extent.  An exercise of review in the cadre strength  from  year to year, thereafter, cecomes  necessary because  while on the one said the financial difficulties of the  State  have  to be kept in view on the other  said  the welfare  of  the  workmen  who  have  served  the  State  on different  projects has to be balanced.  Concern is also  to be shown for those who have worked for a number of years and have become ineligible for any other employment anywhere, be that  the private sector or the public sector.  Therefore, a balance has to be struck between the two competing interests and that can be struck by a periodical revision of the cadre strength  from  year to year.  We must also impress  on  the State Govt.  that if work charged employees have been on the establishment  for long periods, the State should be liberal in  the matter of revision of the cadre strength so that the benefit  of regularisation is available to a reasonably good number  of  work-charged employees who have been  associated with the State Departments for long periods "

     Tested on the touch-stones of the principles laid down in the decisions noted above and keeping in mind the mandate of the Constitution under Articles 38(1), 39(e) & 43, we are of  the  considered view that the directions issued  by  the High  Court  to  the  appellants  to  frame  a  scheme   for regularisation  of services of the writ petitioners does not warrant  interference.  However, considering the submissions made  by learned counsel for the appellants that the Company is under financial constraints and has decided to reduce its work  force, we would like to clarify that while framing the scheme  it  would be open to the appellant-Company  and  the officers concerned to assess the requirement of regular work force  in  its different units, particularly, the  units  in which  the  writ  petitioners have been  engaged  over  long periods  and  also  the  necessity for  alleviation  of  the suffering  to which the writ petitioners have been subjected to during all these years and fix the strength of work force so that the workers concerned are able to get the benefit of regular  service within a reasonable time.  It goes  without saying  that the absorption of the casual workers in regular service will be subject to the fulfillment of the conditions of  eligibility  qualification  with relaxation of  the  age prescribed under the rules.

     Subject  to  the above modification, the judgement  of the  learned  Single  Judge  of the High  Court,  which  was confirmed by the Division Bench, is maintained.  The appeals are disposed of accordingly.  No costs.