DIRECTOR GENERAL DOORDARSHAN MANDI HOUSE, NEW DELHI AND ORS. versus MANAS DEY AND ORS.

Citation: [2005] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 298 · Decided: 17-11-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
DIRECTOR GENERAL DOORDARSHAN MANDI HOUSE, 
NEW DELHI AND ORS. 
v. 
MANAS DEY AND ORS. 
B 
NOVEMBER 17, 2005 
[ARIJITPASAYAT ANDR.V. RAVEENDRAN,JJ.] 
Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) 
C Scheme, 1.993--Clause 4-Nature of scheme-Held: Not an ongoing scheme-
To acquire "temporary" status, the casual labourer should be in employment 
as on the date of commencement of the Scheme and also should have rendered 
a continuous service of at least one year. 
Respondents tiled 0.A. claiming grant of temporary status under Casual 
D Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme, 1993 on 
the ground that they had rendered service from 1988 to 1997 as casual 
workers. Tribunal allowed O.A. holding that it is an ongoing scheme and as 
and when casual labourers complete 240 days of work in a year or 206 days 
(in case of offices observing 5 days a week), they are entitled to get 
"temporary" status. High Cour~ affirmed the order of Tribunal. Hence the 
E present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: Clause 4 of Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and 
Regularization) Scheme, 19.93 states that the conferment of "temporary" 
F status is to be given to the casual labourers who were in employment as on 
the date of commencement of the Scheme. Clause 4 of the Scheme does not 
envisage it as a~ ongoing scheme. In order to acquire "temporary" status, 
the casual labo~rer should have been in employment as on the date of 
commencement of the Scheme and he should have also rendered a continuous 
G service of at least one year which means that he should have been engaged 
for a period of at least 240 days in a year or 206 days in case of offices 
observing 5 days a week. From clause 4 of the Scheme, it does not appear to 
be a general guideline to be applied for the purpose of giving "temporary" 
status to all the casual workers, as and when they complete one year's 
continuous service. (300-G; 301-A, BJ 
I-I 
298 
-
DIRECTOR GENERAL DOORDARSHAN v. MANAS DEY (PASAYAT,J.] 299 
Union of India v. Gagan Kumar, JT (2005) 6 SC 410, relied on. 
A 
Union of India and Anr. v. Mohan Lal and Ors., (200214 SCC 573, held 
inapplicable. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6857 of2005. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.9.2004 of the Calcutta High 
Court in W.P.C.T. No. 1341 of2001. 
Rajeev Sharma for the Appellants. 
B 
Dhruv Mehta, Rana S. Biswas and Mrs. Sarla Chandra for the C 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. Leave granted. 
Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a 
Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court holding that the respondent were 
entitled to the benefit under the scheme called Casual Labourers (Grant of 
Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme, 1993 of Government of India. 
Judgment and order dated 7th September, 2001 passed by the Calcutta Bench 
D 
of Central Administrative Tribunal (in short the 'Tribunal') in OA No. 992 of E 
1998 filed by the respondent under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribupal 
Act, 1985 (in short the 'Act') was held to be in order. Factual background in 
a nutshell is as follows: 
~spondents filed an original application before the Tribunal claiming 
that they had rendered service from 1988 to 1997 as casual workers. According F 
to them they have completed the requisite period of service as described 
hereinbelow: 
"It was claimed that the department had circulated by O.M. No. 51016/ 
2/90-Estt.(C) dated 10.9.1993 a scheme for grant of temporary status 
and regularization of casual workers. The scheme is called Casual G 
Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme of 
Govt. oflndia, 1993. The said scheme came into force with effect from 
1.9.1993. The scheme envisaged grant of temporary status to casual 
labourer who had worked at least 240 days in a year (206) days i11i the 
case of offices observing 5 days a week)". 
H 
300 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [~005) SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A 
The relevant portion of paragraph 3 of the scheme reads as follows: 
"This scheme is applicable to casual labourers in employment of 
the Ministries/Department of Government of India and their attached 
and subordinate officer, on the date of issue of these order." 
B 
Paragraph 4(1) of the Scheme reads as follows: 
"Temporary Status - Temporary status would be conferred on all 
casual labourers who are in employment on the date of issue of this 
O.M. and have rendere
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.