TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 1330X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being run by the Department of Commerce and Industries of the State Government. In 1963, the State Government formed a Board of Directors for the administration of these industrial units by its order No. 189/C of 1963 dated 10th August 1963. The Board of Directors was constituted by- i) Prime Minister - Chairman ii) Sh.Karnail Singh, Hon. Advisory to Govt. for Planningand Industries - Vice-Chairman iii) Sh.S.M.Agha,IAS - Managing Director iv) Sh. Amar Singh, IAS Member (Ex-officio) Director of Industries v) Sh.S.A.S. Qadir,IAS Registrar Cooperatives - do- vi) Sh. Ghulam Ahmad Financial Controller - do- The order also provided for the the re-designation of the officers Incharge of the industrial concerns as Managers in the respective concerns. All Managers were placed under the overall control of the Managing Director and the Board of Directors. On 3rd October 1963, the Jammu and Kashmir Industries Ltd., the respondent No. 2 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s said: In the instant case if the petitioners are to be treated as employees of the company the character and nature of their service is completely changed and they would cease to enjoy the immunity and protection given to them by S.126 of the State Constitution; and if a Government servant who is entitled to protection under section 126 is suddenly deprived of this protection without any notice then such an action cannot but be held to be either as a termination of his service or a reduction in rank. The Court also rejected the arguments of the respondents based on Article 207 of the Regulations that consequent upon the formation of the Company the Sericulture Department was abolished and that the services of the Government employees had been transferred to the Company. The Court found that there was nothing on record to show that the petitioners had in fact been discharged from Government service nor was any notice given to them in this regard nor were they given any option to take compensation or to opt to be appointed under the Company. The procedure under Article 207 of the Regulations not having been followed, the impugned notification could not be sustained. The am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l report in 1980. The report was accepted by a decision of the Cabinet on 22nd April, 1980. On the basis of this Cabinet decision the Governor issued an order on 26th April, 1980 pursuant to which the Company issued two orders both dated 8th May, 1980 one relating to the cost of living allowance and the second relating to fixation of wages. A third order was issued by the company on 10th November,1980 seeking to lay down that the leave of regular employees of the Company would be allowed as per the Factories Act and not as per Leave Rules of the Corporation which were applicable to them in the past . All three orders in effect denied the employees like the appellants parity of service conditions with Government employees. In 1981 the appellants challenged the orders dated 8th May, 1980 and 10th November, 1980 under Article 32 of the Constitution before this Court. According to the appellants when the matter was heard on 22nd March, 1982, this Court was of the view that the appellants should approach the High Court first. As such the appellants withdrew the writ petition under Article 32 and immediately filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the High Court (SWP 236/82) c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is based on an erroneous interpretation of the Article. To start with the High Court ignored Article 1-(a) of the Regulations which clarifies that these Regulations are intended to define the conditions under which Salaries, Leave, Pension, Travelling or other allowances are earned by Service in the Civil Departments and in what manner they are calculated. They do not deal otherwise than indirectly and incidentally with matters relating to recruitment, promotion, official duties, discipline or the like. (Emphasis supplied) Article 207 is contained in Chapter XVII of the Regulations which deals with the conditions of grant of pension. It was, in this context that the Article had been framed. It deals with pension and its computation. It does not purport to determine status at all. It reads: 207. If an officer is selected for discharge owing to the abolition of his permanent post he shall, unless he is appointed to another post the conditions of which are deemed to be at least equal to those of his own, have the option (a) of taking any compensation pension or gratuity to which he may be entitled for the service he has rendered; or (b) of accepting another appointment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he State Government and as permanent residents of the State of Jammu and Kashmir are entitled under Section 10 of the State Constitution to be treated on par with other Government servants in keeping with Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. By the impugned orders, the State Government has sought to deny the appellants such equality. The impugned orders cannot, therefore, be constitutionally sustained and must consequently be quashed. But should the appellants be denied their right to relief because of the finding of delay and laches by the High Court? We think not. The narration of facts clearly show that there was in fact no delay or laches on the part of the appellants. Till 1972 at least, the High Court in Ghulam Mohamad's case (supra) found the State had not denied parity of status and the employees were granted the right to challenge any denial of status if and when it took place. The appellants were in fact treated on par with other Government employees till the impugned orders were issued on the basis of the 1980 Wage Committee Report. These were challenged in 1981 before this Court and in 1982 before the High Court by the appellants. The fact that the Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
