STATE OF ASSAM versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2010] 12 S.C.R. 413 · Decided: 30-09-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

Party: 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 413 
STATE OF ASSAM 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 8378-8392 of 2010) 
SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 
[D.K. JAIN AND H.L. DATTU, JJ.] 
A 
B 
lmpleadment of party - Held: In proceedings for a writ of c 
certiorari, not only the Tribunal or Authority whose order is 
sought to be quashed but also the parties in whose favour the 
said order is issued are necessary parties - Writ petition by 
Voluntary Female Attendants seeking parity of pay scale as 
'ward girls', which was '900-1435 p.m. - Single judge of High 
0 
Court directing respondents including Union of India and 
State Government to pay Rs.9PO p.m. - Writ appeal by Union 
of India - State Government not impleaded as a party -
Division Bench of High Court shifting the liability of payment 
of salary/wages on the State Government - Held: Division 
E 
Bench of High Court should have taken care and caution to 
find out whether the State Government was arrayed as a party 
to the proceedings and whether they were served with the 
notice of the appeals - In such matters, even if by mistake of 
the party, the proper parties were not arrayed in the 
proceedings, it is the duty of the Court to see that the parties 
F 
are properly impleaded - It is well settled principle consistent 
with natural justice that if some persons are likely to be 
affected on account of setting aside a decision enuring to their 
benefit, the court should not embark upon the consideration 
and the correctness of such decision, in the absence of such 
G 
persons - State Government was a necessary party - Non-
impledment of State Government resulted in imposition of 
huge recurring financial liability on it without a fair hearing -
Matter remitted to High Court for consideration afresh -
413 
H 
414 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 
A However, State Government directed to pay minimum wages 
during the pendency of appeals before High Court subject to 
final orders - Natural justice - Writ of certiorari - Service law 
- Parity in pay scale. 
8 
Necessary party and proper party - Distinction between 
- Held: A necessary party is one without whom, no order can 
be made effectively and a proper party is one in whose 
absence an effective order can be made but whose presence 
is necessary for a complete and final decision of the question 
C involved in the proceeding. 
Evidence: Admission - Held: The a/legation of fact, if not 
denied/controverted in the counter affidavit, normally, it shall 
be taken to be admitted by the respondents. 
0 
Judgment/order: Appeal against a judgment - Duty of 
appellate court - Held: Appellate court has to look into the 
impugned judgment for the facts stated therein and not infer 
facts based on what is urged before it. 
The Union of India had introduced "Family Welfare 
E Scheme" under its Family Planning Programme with 
effect from 1st September, 1966. Under the scheme, there 
was a provision for the appointment of 'Voluntary Female 
Attendants' on a monthly honorarium of Rs.50/- from the 
inception of the scheme, which was subsequently 
F increased to Rs.100/- p.m. In 1973, one such Voluntary 
Female Attendant, Nandeshwari Devi filed a writ petition 
before the High Court against the State of Assam on the 
· ground that the work of the Voluntary Female Attendant 
under the said scheme and that of the regularly 
G appointed 'Ward Girls' by the Union of India was similar 
and, therefore, they were entitled to parity in the pay scale 
as 'Ward Girls" which at that time was Rs.900-1435 per 
month. The single judge of the High Court partly allowed 
the writ petition and directed the State Government to pay 
H 
STATE OF ASSAM v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
415 
ETC. 
the minimum pay-scale in the time-scale of pay i.e. Rs.900/ 
A 
- p.m. After the said decision, nearly 54 Voluntary Female 
Attendants filed the writ petition in the High Court 
seeking the same relief that was granted in Nandeshiwari 
Bora's case. The relief that was sought in the writ petition 
was for regularisation of their services and for payment 
B 
of salary as per the existing pay scale. In the light of 
decision in Nandeshwari Bora's case, the single judge of 
the High Court partly allowed the writ petition and directed 
all the respondents including the Union of India and the 
State Government to pay Rs.900/- p.m., the minimum of c 
the pay scale to the Voluntary Female Attendants. 
However, with regard to the question of regularization of 
service, the High
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.