PARAS NATH AND ANR. MAMMAN SINGH AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1989] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 323 · Decided: 28-11-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Case Allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

-. 
PARAS NATH AND ANR. MAMMAN SINGH AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 28, 1989 
[RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND 
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.) 
Delhi Milk Scheme: Dairy Mates-Junior plant _operatives-semi 
skilled operatives-Grievance-Doing work of skilled workers-But 
classified as unskilled workers and paid salary-Validity of. 
A 
B 
The firsf petition is on behalf of one thousand Dairy Mates and the C 
other on behalf of 280 workers as Junior Plant Operatives and semi-
skilled Operatives. The grievance of Dairy Mates is that although they 
perform the duties of semi-skilled workers they have been wrongly 
classified as unskilled workers and paid salaries as suclt Similarly the 
grievance of the Junior Plant Operatives and semi-skilled Operatives is D 
that they are actually doing the work of skilled workers but are clas-
sified as unskilled workers and paid salary as such. 
In view of the disputed questions rel;lting to the nature and func-
tions of the workmen involved, the Court referred the matter to the 
Central Govt. Industrial Tribm.ial-cum-Labour Court to report to the 
E 
Court as to what would be appropriate pay scales admissible to the 
concerned workers. On the basis of additional material and evidence 
produced by the workers, the Tribunal made its report and recom-
mended that taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, 
the Mates and JPOs may be given the pay scale of Rs.800-1150, the 
semi-skilled operatives may be given the scale"of Rs.825-1200 and the 
F 
skilled operatives may be given the scale of Rs.950-1400. The Union of 
India criticised the pay scale recommended to the Mates co.i'tending 
that their work was of unskilled nature. Accepting the report of the 
Tribunal while allowing the Petitions in terms of the report, this Court, 
HELD: There is no roster of duties and functions of the Mates in 
G 
any Unit and all Mates have to do the work of the Units to which they 
are assigned on any particular day. The Mates have thus to be versatile 
with the work in all the Units, both unskilled and semi-skilled. This is 
certainly not the case with the Sweepers, Chowkidars and Malis who 
are categorised as unskilled workers. This being the case, there is no 
merit in the contention of the Union of India that the Mates should be 
H 
323 
A 
B 
c 
324 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 
treated on par with the unskilled workers. [328C-D I 
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition Nos. 251 & 558 of 
1987. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) 
R.K. Jain and R.P. Gupta for the Petitioners. 
Kapil Sibal, R.B. Misra, B.B. Sawhney, R.K. Mehta (N.P.) and 
Ms. A. Subhashini for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SAWANT, J. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 251 of 1987 
are Dairy Mates whereas, those in Writ Petition No. 558 of 1987 are 
Junior Plant Operatives and Semi-Skilled Operatives, all working with 
the Delhi Milk Scheme. The first petition is on behalf of about one 
D thousand workers, whereas, the second petition is on behalf of about 
280 of workers. 
E 
F 
G 
H 
2. The grievance of the Dairy Mates is that although they 
perform the duties and functions of semi-skilled workers, they have 
been wrongly classified as un-skilled workers and paid salary as such, 
as recommended by the 4th Pay Commission namely, Rs.750-940 
instead of Rs.800-1150 which is the salary recommended to the semi-
skilled workers. The grievance of the Junior Plant Operatives and 
Semi-Skilled Operatives is that they are actually doing the work of 
skilled workers, but are classified similarly as unskilled workers and 
paid salary as such. Both, further, have a grievance that their counter-
parts ifi other departments, particularly in Railways, have been pro-
perly classified and are paid salary acc\lrdingly. 
3. The petitions were resisted by the respondent Union of India 
by filing counter affidavits denying the contentions of the petitioners 
that their work was of a semi-skilled or skilled character as alleged. 
4. In view of the disputed questions relating to the nature and 
functions of the workmen involved, this Court by its order of July 29, 
1988 referred the matter to the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, New Delhi to report to the Court on what would be the 
appropriate pay-scales admissible to the concerned workers, after 
looking into the record and giving an opportunity to the parties to 
produce before it such further material

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.