JAGRIT MAZDOOR UNION (REGD.) & ORS. ETC. ETC. versus MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. & ANR. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1989] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 329 · Decided: 29-11-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

JAGRIT MAZDOOR UNION (REGO.) & ORS. ETC. ETC. 
v. 
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. & ANR. 
ETC. ETC. 
NOVEMBER 29, 1989 
[RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND K. RAMAS-
WAMY, JJ.] 
Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status) Regulation 
Scheme, 1989: Reserve Trained Pool Telephone Operators-Regulari-
sation of-Directions by Court. 
The Petitioners in first two Writ Petitions are Reserve Trained 
Pool Telephone Operators (RTPI'OS) of Delhi and Bombay Mahanagar 
Telephones who are seeking directions that after their absorption as 
regular employees following the implemeiitation of the directions of this 
Court dated 28.7.1986 in an earlier Writ Petition No. 11764 of 1985 
filed by the All India Telegraph Engineering Employees Union Class III 
of Bombay Telephones, they are _entitled to be brought on par with the 
regular Staff for grant of all other service benefits as well since they 
have been performing the same dnties 'as performed by regular 
operators. 
The other two P~titions pertain to the Department of Posts. One is 
b.y the Reserve Trained. Pool Operators (RTPOS) and the other by the 
Substitute Employees and Casual Labourers in that Department. While 
' 
the RTPOS have claimed relief of being placed at par with regular, 
permanent or temporary employees in the matte~ of service conditions, 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
the substitute employees and casual labourers claim that they be paid 
F 
the same emoluments as the regular employees. 
Disposing of the Petitions, this Court, 
HELD: The scheme known as Casual Labourers (Grant of 
Temporary Status in Regularisation) Scheme has been formulated and 
G 
pnt into operation from 1.10.1989. Hence no further specific direction 
is necessary as regards applicants covered by the Telephone Nigams of 
. Delhi and Bombay except calling npon the respondents to implement 
every term of the Scheme at an early date. [332E-F] 
As per existing recruitment rules, extra-departmental agents are 
H 
329 
330 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
given preference in the matter of absorption as Group 'D' postmen. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
Directions have already been issued for their absorption against the 
vacancies. [333H] 
, 
The ciaim to bonus may be ten to arbitration or for being dealt 
with by a Consultative Council. [334F] 
~ 
After rendering three years of continuous service with temporary 
status, the casual labourers shall be treated at par with temporary 
Grade 'D' employees of the Department of Posts and would thereby be 
entitled to such benefits as' are admissible to Group 'D' employees on 
regular basis. [335B] 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 1119 
of 1986 etc. etc. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia). 
G. Ramaswamy, A.S.G., N.C. Sikri, N.S. Das Bahl, B.D. 
Sharma, Ms. Madhu Sikri, B.W. Vaidya, R.B. Misra, Ms. A.' 
Subhashini (not present) and Dalveer Bhandari for the appearing 
parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RANGANATH MISRA, J. The first of these applications under 
Art. 32 of the Constitution is on behalf of the Delhi Reserve Trained 
Pool Telephone Operators (RTPTOs) asking for a direction to the 
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited to treat all the telephorie 
operators at par after their absorption as regular employees. Three 
F 
letters addressed to the learned Chief Justice of this Court have been 
treated as writ petitions and are the remaining one under Art. 32 of the 
Constitution. The first one ( 1276/86) is by the Reserve Trained Pool 
Telephone Operators of Bombay. They claim the self-same relief as 
asked for in the earlier case; the second one ( 1623/86) is on behalf of 
the Reserve Trained Pool Operators in the Department of Posts and 
G they have claimed relief of being placed at par with regular, permanent 
or temporary employees in the matter of service conditions. The third 
one ( 1624/86) is on behalf of substitute employees and casual labou-
rers in the Department of Posts. They have claimed that substitute 
employees and casual labourers be paid the same emoluments as regu-
H lar employees. 
•
JAGRIT MAZDOOR v. TELEPHONE NIGAM [MISRA, J.] 
331 
In an earlier Writ Petition No. 11764 of 1985 filed by the All 
India Telegraph Engineering Employees Union Class III of Bombay 
Telephone where the prayer for treating the Reserve Trained Pool 
Telephone Operators at par with regular staff had also been asked for, 
this Court made the following order on 1.5. 1986: 
"The matter is adjourned to 28. 7. 1986 to enable the new
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.