LexJASWANT SINGH & ORS. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c 426 JASWANT SINGH & ORS. ETC. v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. August 29, 1979 (Y. V. CIIANDRACHUD, C.J., S: MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.] Punjclb Reorganisation A~t 1966-Ss. 79 & 80-Scope of-Officers and stafi employed by Beas Control Board an4 later transferred to Bhakra Mana§'e• ment Board-If Central Government Employees. Constitution of India-Arts. 14 & 16-Temporary employees recruited for specified work-Services terminated while retaining the services of deputa- tionists-lf violative of Arts. 14 & 16. Central Civil Services (TemporQry Service) Rules, 1965-R. 3-GoverninCiit servant-When would become a quasi permanent servant. D Labour law-Work-charged employees-If Government ·servants. E F G H The Beas Project, which was commenced in .1960, was a joint venture of the composite State of Punjab and the. State of Rajasthan. All decisions ,on policy and administrative matters relating to· the project were entrusted to a Board known as the Beas Control Board, which was constituted by the Central Government in consultation witlr the Stafe Governments concerned. For i:he purpose of construction and completion of the Project Eiigineers and a large number of other categories of employees were taken on d'eputation from :the States of Punjab and Rajasthan and some others. were directly recruired by the Beas Control Board. In th'e meactime in the year 1966, the State of Punjab was reorganized ::~nd the new States of Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh came into being and a part of the- Punjab TerritOry was transferred to the then Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh. The Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966 conta·lns a chapter on Bhakra Nangal and Beas Projects. After 1966, the Project be- came the concern of the State· of Rajasthan and the successor St~es of Punjab, Haryana and the then Union Territory Jlimachal Prades-b. The Bhakra Management Board codstituted by the Central Governm1!nt under s. 79(1) of the Act for the a.dministration, maintenance and operation of works specified in clauses (a) to (g) of that sub~section was empowered to emp1oy the n'ecessary staff for the efficient discharge of its functions. 'rhe proviso to s.. 79(4) of the Act states that every person who immediately before the constitution of the said Board was engaged in the construction. maintenance or operation of the worlcs shall continu'e to be so employed under the Board in connection with the sa.id works on the same terms and conditions of service as were ·applicable to him before such constitution until the Central Government .bY order direct$ oth'erwise. The Bhakra Management Board was placed· under the control of the Central 'Government. By virtue of s.80(1), construction of the Beas Project was to be undertaken by the Central Governmerit on behalf JAS\VANT SINGII V. UNION 421 <Jf the successor States and the State of Rajasthan. Section 80(2) of the Act A .empowers the Central Government to constitute the Beas Coiistruction Board and the Board was empowered to appoint such staff as- may be neceSsary for the efficient discharge of its functions .. The first proviso to s. 80(3) is in 5im.i- 1ar terms to the proviso to s. 79(4). By sub-s. (5) any component of the Beas Project in relation to which the cons-truction has been completed after Novem- ber 1, 1966, may be transferr'ed by the Central Government to the Bhakra Management. Board Constituted under s. 79 and there"upon the provisions , of B s. 79 become applicable as if works transferred to the Bhakra .l\fanagement Board were included in s.79(1). Sub-section (6) of Section 80 provideS thil.t the Bhakhra .l\fanagement Board shall be re-named as the Bhakra. Beas .l\fanagement Board, when any of the components of the Beas Project has been transferred end that the Beas Construction Boord shall cease to exist when all .the components of the Beas Project have been so transferred. The Petitioners who \Vere officers and staff of various categories and whose C services were sought to . be terminated by wa•y of retrenchment on the com- pletion of the Project "'-ork contended ( 1) that they were employees of the Centre.I Government, (2) that their. conditions of service Were governed by rules which apply to its temporary employees and (3) that the orders of ri:tren-. -chment passed against them \vhile retaining th'e deputationists in service ·were -violative of Arts~ 14 and 16 of the Constitu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.