UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus KAMLA DEVI

Citation: [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 782 · Decided: 22-07-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RUMA PAL, AR. LAKSHMANAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

'I 
A 
B 
c 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
v. 
KAMLADEVI 
illLY22,2005 
[MRS. RUMA PAL AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Pension-Cut-off date-Railways-Non-statutory canteen employees-
Cut-off date classifying them as sucfl-Grant of pension to those who retired 
after 1.10.1991-By order dated 10.8.1993 passed by Supreme Court-
Employee retiring prior to 1.10.1991 claiming pension-Held, as far as cut 
off date of classification of non-statutory canteen employees is concerned, it 
D must be taken to have been concluded by order dated 10.8.1993-/t was not 
open to the employees concerned to seek variation of the same. 
MMR. Khan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [1990) Supp. SCC 
191, referred to. 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE illRISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4502 of2005. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 3.8.2004 of the Delhi High Court 
in W.P. (C) No. 12903 of2004. 
Harish Chandra, Ms. Pareena Swarup, Praveen Swarup, Amit Singh and 
F V.K. Verma with him for the Appellants. 
Mrs. Rekha Palli for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
G 
ORDER 
Leave granted. 
The respondent's husband was a canteen employee. He was appointed 
on 1st December 1979. On 12.7.1990 he retired on medical grounds. In the 
meanwhile, the Government had issued a Notification on 11.12.1979 by which 
II 
782 
U.0.1. v. KAMLA DEVI 
783 
with effect from 1.10.1979 the Government would treat all posts in canteen and A 
tiffin rooms run departmentally by the Government of India as civil posts. It 
was made clear by Notification dated l l.12.1979 that all present and future 
incumbents of the posts would qualify as holders of Civil posts under the 
Central Government and that necessary rules governing their conditions of 
service would be framed under proviso to Art.309 of the Constitution of India B 
to have retrospective effect from first day of October, 1979. 
The workers of the canteen then filed proceedings under Art.32 before 
this Court for enforcement of their rights claiming inter alia parity with 
Railway employees. The workers of three classes of canteens were the claimants 
viz. (i) Statutory canteens (ii) Non-statutory recognized canteens and (iii) non- C 
statutory non-recognized canteens. 
The issue as to whether all the canteen employees should be treated 
as Railway employees and whether all service conditions be extended to them 
which are available to Railway employees was decided by this Court in 
· M.M.R. Khan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in [1990] Supp. D 
SCC 191. This Court held that the relation~hip of employer and employee has 
been created between the Railway Administration and the canteen employees 
from the very inception and that it would not be gainsaid that for the purposes 
of the Factories Act, the employees in the statutory canteen were the 
employees of the Railway. It was noted that the Railway Board had already 
treated the employees of all statutory and eleven daily basis non-statutory E 
recognised canteens as Railway employees with effect from October 27, 1980. 
However, the Court went on to say that the employees of the other non-
statutory recognised canteens would, however, be treated as Railway 
employees with effect from 1st April 1990, and that they would be extended 
all the benefits as such Railway employees with effect from that date, according F 
to the service conditions prescribed for them under the relevant rules and 
orders. The claim of the non-statutory non-recognized canteen workers was 
negatived. 
The husband of the respondent together with other employees of non-
statutory recognized canteens filed writ petitions in which similar reliefs as G 
were considered and granted in M.M.R. Khan's case were prayed for, The 
Court disposed of the writ petition by the following 'order on 11. l 0.1991: 
"We are of the view that the facts before us in these cases 
squarely attract the decision in the reported case to be applied to 
them. In that view of the matter, we allow the Writ Petitions for the H 
784 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
reasons indicated in the said Judgement and direct the benefits to be 
given to the Petitioners in the following way. 
B 
By an interim order dated 26. 9 .1983 certain reliefs had been granted. 
In respect of the reliefs already granted this order shall be deemed.to 
be operative from that date. In case any further benefits are admissible, 
those will be admissible from 1.10.1991. 
For the purpose of calculation
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.