UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus CHOTELAL AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 449 · Decided: 09-12-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUJATA V. MANOHAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
CHOTELAL AND ORS. 
DECEMBER~" 1998 
[SUJATA V. MANOHAR AND G.B. PATTA~IK, JJ.] 
B 
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985-Section 14 (J)(a)-Post of Dhabi 
at National Defence Academy-Whether Civil Post-Paid out of Regimental 
Fund-Held-Regimental Fund not public fund-Dhobis not holding Civil 
Post-Jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal barred. 
C 
Defence Services Regulation-Para 801 (a)&(b) and Rule 820-Public 
Fund- Regimental Fund-Not public fund-Exercise of some control by 
commanding officer on Dhobis-Will not mean payment to them is made from 
Consolidated Fund or of any Public Fund. 
D 
The respondents are Dhobis appointed to wash the clothes of the cadets 
at NDA, Khadakwasla and are paid from the fund called 'Regimental Fund'. 
The question which arose for consideration was whether Dhobis so appointed 
can be said to be holders of civil post so as to confer jurisdiction on the 
Central Administrative Tribunal for issuing direction in relation to their 
~~~~-
E 
The Tribunal by the impugned judgment concluded that the 'Regimental 
Fund' from out of which Dhobis are paid their salaries gets covered by both 
the Consolidated Fund of India through the grants-in-aid and it is paid to the 
institutions under the military which have to be funded and set up to ensure 
the various activities. It further held that Regimental Funds are controlled F 
and audited by the Controller and Auditor General of Defence Account 
alongwith other Public Accounts of the Government and as such the posts 
of Dhobis are civilian posts connected with Defence conferring jurisdiction 
on the Tribunal to redress the grievances. 
Before this Court, it was contended on behalf of the UOI that Dhobis 
engaged for washing clothes of the cadets do not satisfy any of the conditions 
enumerated under Section 14(l)(a) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 
so as to con fer jurisdiction on the Central Administrative Tribunal. 
G 
On behalf of the respondents it was contended that the washing H 
449 
450 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A allowance pJyable to the cadet being paid from the Consolidated Fund oflndia 
and the same being credited into a fund called 'Regimental Fund' and Dho1ii5 
being paid out of the said funds, the Tribunal was justified in coming to the 
conclusion that the Regimental Fund itself gets impressed with the character 
of tho.consolidated Fund and holders of post paid out of that fund in the true 
spirit and sense must be held to be holders of civil post under the Ministry 
B of Defence of the Union Government and, therefore Tribunal gets the 
jurisdiction to decide the service conditions of the holders of such posts. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD: 1.1. The Regimental Fund cannot be held to be Public Fund by 
C any stretch of imagination and the Dhobis paid out of such fund cannot be 
held to be holders of Civil Post within the Ministry of Defence so as to confer 
jurisdiction on the Central Admipistrative Tribunal to issue directions 
~elating to their service conditions. [453-8-C] 
D 
1.2. Only because of exercise of some control by the Commanding 
Officer over such Dhobis it can not be concluded that these posts are civil 
posts and that payment to the holders of such post is made from out of the 
Consolidated Fund of India or of any public fund under the control of 
Ministry of Defence. [453-C-DJ 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 921 of 1995. 
From the Judgment and Ord.er dated 9.2.94 of the Central Administrative 
Tribunal at Bombay in O.A. No. 454 of 1992. 
V.C. Mahajan, N.B. Shetye, Ms. Rekha Pandey, R.B. Misra, Ms. Halida 
F Khatoon, (S.W.A. Qadri) for Ms. A. Subhashini, A.M. Khanwilkar, A.P. Mayee, 
C.A. Khaladkar, (Dr. Suman! Bhardwaj) for Ms. Mirdula Ray Bhardwaj, Ms. 
Subhadra Chturvedi, Amitabh Chaturvedi and Rajesh Nair, (Naresh Kum_ar) for 
K.N. Rai for the apperaing parties. 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PATT ANAIK, J. This appeal by Union of India is directed against the 
order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench, Bombay, dated 
9.1.1994. The short question that arises for consideration is whether Dhobis 
appointed to wash the clothes of the cadets at NOA, Khadakwasla and are 
paid from the fund called 'Regimental Fund' can be said to be holders of civil 
H post so as to confer jurisdiction on the Central Administrative Tribunal for 
U.0.1. v. CHOTELAL [PATTANAIK, J.] 
451 
issuing any directio

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