JUDGMENT The central point for determination of the subject matter under the challenge is paragraph 2(c) of Circular No. 124 (the said Circular for shot) dated December 14, 1982 issued by the Food Corporation of India, Head Quarter, New Delhi, (for short F.C.I. hereafter) and the refusal of F.C.I. to pay over-time allowance in accordance with the provisions of the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act, 1963 (for short the said Act, 1963 hereafter) to the staff of Regional Offices, District Offices and other so-called administrative offices situated in West Bengal for the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984. For the sake of convenience, it is proper for the Court to refer to the said Circular which is quoted below :- "The matter regarding payment of OTA as per the provisions of Shops & Establishments Acts of different States to the employees’ of the Corporation governed by FCI (Staff) Regulations, 1971, was under consideration of the Corporation for some time past. It has now been decided in consultation with the Government of India to regular the payment of OTA to the employees w.e.f. 1/12/82 subject to the following :- 1. (a) The provisions of the Shops & Establishments Act in respect of OTA payments will be applicable only to the staff working in ports, godowns and depots falling within the local areas to which the Act has been extended. (b) No over-time will be payable unless work is performed beyond the limits of daily/weekly working hours fixed by the various states laws in this respect. (c) No over-time allowance will be admissible for period of work in excess of 40 hours but less than 48 hours per week. (d) The rate of over-time will be calculated as per the provisions of the respective Shops & Establishments Act of the concerned States. (e) Over-time payment will also be restricted to the weekly/monthly/quarterly/yearly ceiling fixed by the respective State laws. 2. The provisions relating to OTA payments as per Shops & Establishments Act will not be applicable to the following staff:- (a) Staff working in depots, godowns and ports in the States where the State Governments have informed that the Act is not applicable and also where exemption has been granted to the FCI from the application of provisions relating to OTA as per Shops & Establishments Act. (b) Staff working in depots, godowns and ports which are located in an area where the Shops and Establishments Act of the State has not been extended. (c) Regular employees of the Head Quarters, Zonal Officer, Regional Offices, District Offices and other Administrative Offices of the Corporation. 3. Payment of OTA to these above cited employees shall continue to the regulated as per the existing rules of the Corporation i.e. Government of India rules). 4. The existing Procurement Allowances shall not be payable at those centres where the Shops & Establishments Act is applicable and ill in force. 5. In places where extra Duty Allowance being paid, the same shall be continued to be paid until further orders. 6. It may also be ensured that- (a) Appropriates steps are taken to ensure that normal work is a performed during the specified working hours. (b) The question of seeking exemptions from the provisions of the relevant Shops & Establishments Act may continue to be pursued vigorously with the State Governments concerned; and (c) The position regarding applicability of the relevant Act in force in different States may be kept under periodical review. 7. The receipt of the circular may be acknowledged and necessary instructions may be issued to all subordinate offices. 8. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Division in the Headquarters." 2. The factual matrix as cast in the writ applicable broadly presents as under :- F.C.I. in consultation with the Government of India by the said Circular decided to grant over-time allowance effectively from December 1, 1982 to the staff engaged and employed in Ports, Godowns and Depots in local areas to which Shops and Establishments Acts of the different States apply, the so-called Administrative Offices were excluded from the benefit of overtime allowances under the different Shops and Establishments Acts of the different States. 3. The State of West Bengal by a Notification dated September 14, 1984 granted an exemption to the said Corporation from operation of sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the said Act, 1963. 3. The State of West Bengal by a Notification dated September 14, 1984 granted an exemption to the said Corporation from operation of sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the said Act, 1963. The relevant portion of the said Notification reads thus :- "Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (2) of section 4 of the West Bengal Shops & Establishments Acts, 1963 (West Bengal Act XIII of 1963, hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Governor is pleased hereby to exempt with effect from the date of this Notification, all the establishments under the Food Corporation of India set up by Food Corporation Act, 1964 (Act 37 of 1964) engaged in purchases, storage, movement transport, distribution and sale of food grains situated in the areas to which the said Act applies, from the operation of all the provisions of the said Act other than those of sections 8, 9 and 10." 4. The Regional Manager issued a Memo dated April 9, 1987 under paragraph (9) thereof excluded the benefit to the employees of such Administrative Offices. Paragraph (9) as mentioned reads thus :- The Food Corporation of India West Bengal Region 11/A, Mirza Ghalib St. Cal-16. Ref. A-17(1)/72-Pt. Dt. 9th April, 87 To 1) All Dist Manager. FCI, West Bengal Region. 2) Dy. Manager (CSO), FCI, Regional Office, Cal. Sub: -Payment of overtime allowance under the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act, 1963, during the period from 1.12.82 to 13.9.84. Ref :-Our Memo No. A/17(1)/72 Pt. dated 16.2.87 forwarding copy of letter No. Estt-11(8)/83 dated 2.1.87 of Zonal Manager (East) addressed to Jt. Manager (PO), Calcutta. Sir, Some doubts have been raised in connection with the payment of overtime allowance under the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act, 1963. The following clarifications are given. a) Section (1) of the Act deals with the Short title, extent, commencement and Application, Under Notification No. 636-IR February 12, 1975, the Act was extended to depots for storage of commodities. b) Prior to 14.9.84, the State Government of West Bengal exempted the FCI from sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the Act. c) ‘Wages’ is defined in section 2(15) of the Act. d) Rule 39 shows the calculation of ordinary rate of wages of overtime. e) State Government deputationists in FCI get O.T.A. according to FCI rules. b) Prior to 14.9.84, the State Government of West Bengal exempted the FCI from sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the Act. c) ‘Wages’ is defined in section 2(15) of the Act. d) Rule 39 shows the calculation of ordinary rate of wages of overtime. e) State Government deputationists in FCI get O.T.A. according to FCI rules. They are, therefore, entitled to get O.T.A. under the Act during the specified period. f) Arrears to be paid will obviously be adjusted against the O.T.A. paid during the period in question. g) It was made clear in HQ Circular No. 124 of 1982 that payment of O.T.A. under the Act should not be made to employees working in District and Regional Offices. It should be ensured that employees working in District and Regional Offices are not paid OTA under the Act in the light of HQ instructions. However, a reference is being made to higher authorities for instructions whether it would be possible to extend the benefit of OTA under the Act to District and Regional Office employees. No action in this regard should be taken pending further instructions. Yours faithfully, Sd/- D.K. Banerjee. 5. The said Act, 1963 is made applicable to the whole of the State of West Bengal. F.C.I. by Circular dated July 3, 1987 declared the staff of the Administrative Officers of the said Corporation would be treated at par with the staff of godown, depot for the purpose of payment of overtime allowances in all places where the said Corporation has not secured exemption from the provisions of the local Act. 6. That the staff of the Administrative Offices performed the same nature of work as was done by the employees in depot, railway sidings and godown. 7. Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Senior Advocate duly assisted by Mr. Pradipto Kumar Roy, Advocate appearing in support of the writ application made submissions that the said Act, 1963 on its own strength is applicable and does not depend for such application upon the acceptance or non-acceptance by the concerned parties governed by the provisions of the said Act, 1963 that the exemptions accorded to F.C.I. by the State of West Bengal as indicated above and as referred to the writ application demonstrates by necessary implications, that F.C.I. was otherwise governed by the local Act namely, the said Act, 1963. Initial exemption as set out in paragraph 12 of the writ application was limited to sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of She said Act, section 13 of the said Ace, 1963 was not in any way covered by the said initial exemption. By subsequent exemption dated September 14, 1984 was exempted from the operation of section 13 of the said Act, 1963 thereby, F.C.I. is not, under any obligation whatsoever, to pay overtime allowances under the said Act, 1963. After presenting the basic and fundamental aspects of the entire matter, Mr. Mukherjee claimed and contended that the question thus, emerges whether or not F.C.I. has and had liability to make payment of overtime allowances prior to the date of an exemption. The Notification itself accorded exemption from the date of the said Circular. Thereafter, it is claimed by Mr. Mukherjee that any period prior to September 14, 1984 could not be brought within the ambit of the said Notification dated September 14, 1984 and the decision of the authority to treat any period prior to September 14, 1984 is unwarranted, unjustified and without any legal foundation. Mr. Mukherjee further submitted that incorporation cannot claim any immunity from operation of such State Act as would appear from paragraph 2 of the Order No. EP-17-16/87 dated July 3, 1987 as also from Order No. EP-26-2-/82 dated December 14, 1982. The relevant portion of the Order No. EP-17-16/87 is quoted below :- "Many staff Unions and individual employees have been requesting the Corporation to treat the administrative offices of the Corporation viz., Headquarters, Zonal Offices, Regional Offices and District Offices as "Establishment" for the purpose of payment of over time allowance in places where Corporation has not secured exemption from the provisions of the local Shops & Establishments Act. The matter has been examined accordingly in consultation with the Government of India and it has been decided to treat the administrative offices of the Corporation as "Establishments" as per the provisions of the applicable Shops & Establishments Act for the purpose of payment of overtime allowance in such places as the Corporation has not secured exemption from the provisions of the local Shops & Establishments Act. In other words, the administrative offices of the Corporation would be treated at par with the godowns and depots for the purpose of payment of overtime allowance in all places where the Corporation has not secured exemption from the provisions of the local Shops & Establishments Acts." 8. F.C.I. has and all through acknowledged their liability to pay over time allowances to the staff of the Depot and Godowns in States in which no exemption is made in favour of the said Corporation by the local Acts. 9. F.C.I. issued the executive instructions which according to the petitioners is arbitrary to the core. By the said executive instructions, F.C.I. refused to pay such allowances to the staff of the Administrative Office and thus, by their executive instructions and/or order, the operation of the Statute was and is sought to be nullified. Ultimately, the Circular dated July 3, 1987 was issued which, in fact, and in effect, accepts the liability in respect of the Staff of the Administrative Office also. It is the grievances of the petitioners that the employees were thus entitled to the over time allowances for the entire period prior to September 14, 1984 when the State Government accorded exemption to F.C.I. from the operation of section 13 of the said Act, 1963. In the affidavit-in-opposition of F.C.I., the stand taken is that Circular dated July 3, 1987 was issued out of grace and sympathy. The petitioners claimed that they were entitled to over time allowances under the said Act, 1963 as a matter of right and their entitlement does not depend upon mere ipsi dixit of F.C.I. nor it is founded upon grace of F.C.I. The petitioners right to the said over time allowances under the said Act, 1963 constitute properly in terms of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. 10. The right of the petitioners as regards the over time allowances under the said Act is properly and they could not be deprived of such property not the action taken by F.C.I. in denuding the petitioners tight to property is void, legal and constitutional. Refusal of F.C.I. to grant state relief and/or benefit amounts to arbitrariness and unreasonableness. 10. The right of the petitioners as regards the over time allowances under the said Act is properly and they could not be deprived of such property not the action taken by F.C.I. in denuding the petitioners tight to property is void, legal and constitutional. Refusal of F.C.I. to grant state relief and/or benefit amounts to arbitrariness and unreasonableness. Refusal to secure compliance of the provisions of the said Act, 1963 is per se unauthorised, unreasonable and arbitrary to the core and this is more so, when F.C.I. comes whether the sweep of Article 12 of the Constitution and actions as are detailed above offend the right of the petitioners under Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India. 11. Reference was made in Annexures "E", "F" and "G" to the writ petition and reliance was placed on the said Annexures by the petitioners. In support of the contention, the petitioners in the so-called administrative offices performed the same nature of work as those in the godown Railway Sidings and depots, but the latter class of employees are getting higher overtime allowances under the said Act whereas the petitioners were being denied the said benefit in breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Such action of the respondents amounts to the denial of equal pay for equal work. Now being a part of the guarantee as enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Reference was made to the following decisions :- 1. (1) Dhirendra Chamoli & Another v. State of U.P. reported in 1986(1) SCC 637 . 2. (2) M.P. Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. & Others v. Union of India & Others reported in 1987(1) SCC 592 . 12. The petitioners also claimed the benefit of the overtime allowances for the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984. 13. The plea of the respondents that the steps taken by F.C.I. being in accord with the said Act, 1963 no exception could be taken to the decisions of F.C.I. Affidavit-in-Opposition on behalf of respondents was filed and before conclusion of the hearing filed written statement. Stand of the Corporation, inter alia, is as follows :- The writ petition being extremely belated should be dismissed on the ground of delay. Stand of the Corporation, inter alia, is as follows :- The writ petition being extremely belated should be dismissed on the ground of delay. Section 45 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964 (the said Act hereafter) provides for the power of F.C.I. to make regulations with the previous sanction of Central Government to provide for, inter alia, the scale of pay of the offices and employees of F.C.I. The said Corporation's Staff Regulations from time to time made regulations, orders and Circulars to provide the pay and allowance of the Staff of F.C.I. 14. By and order, the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Department of Food, Government of India provided that the overtime allowance to the regular staff of the said Corporation will be en the same terms and conditions as are applicable to the Central Government employees vide letter No. 16-7/75-PC dated April 23, 1976. 15. The Board of Directors of F.C.I. in its 145th meeting held on November 17, 1982 decided to make regular payment of overtime allowances to the employees of F.C.I. working in godown, depot. In terms of the provisions of the said Shops & Establishments Act of the respective States, the employees of the Head Quarter, Regional Offices, District Offices and other Administrative Offices shall be paid overtime allowances according to the existing rules of the F.C.I., namely, the same terms and conditions as are made applicable to the Central Government employees Reference was also made in 6(viii) of Item 10 of the said 145th meeting of F.C.I. 6(viii) of the said Item 10 reads thus:- Circular No. 124/82 dated December 14, 1982 has, inter alia, directed that the provisions for overtime allowances payment in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, 1963 would not be made applicable to the regular employees of Head Quarter, Regional Offices, District Offices and other Administrative Offices of F.C.I. The same would be governed by the existing rules of F.C.I. and the Government of India Rules. The Central Government approved the aforesaid decision F.C.I., West Bengal, issued Circular dated April 9, 1987 whereby District Officers were informed that the State Government employees working in District Offices, Regional Offices would not be accorded overtime allowance under the provisions of the said Act, 1963 as clarified by the aforesaid Circular No. 124/82. The Central Government approved the aforesaid decision F.C.I., West Bengal, issued Circular dated April 9, 1987 whereby District Officers were informed that the State Government employees working in District Offices, Regional Offices would not be accorded overtime allowance under the provisions of the said Act, 1963 as clarified by the aforesaid Circular No. 124/82. Directions of the Central Government upon the F.C.I. as regards the payment of overtime allowances of the staff of F.C.I. under section 45 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964 is binding in character. The F.C.I. sought to resist the plea of the petitioners by contending, inter alia, that the Notification dated September 14, 1984 Government of West Bengal exempted w.e.f. the aforesaid date of establishments under the F.C.I. from the operation of the provisions of the said Act, 1963 other than sections 8, 9 and 10 thereof. In those circumstances, all the members of the staff of F.C.I. according to the petitioners are entitled to get overtime allowances under the said Act. Further, objection as raised by F.C.I. is that under section 45 of Food Corporation Act, 1964 payment in question cannot be made by F.C.I. unless the Regulation of F.C.I. with the sanction of Central Government empowers the authority to do so. Staff of F.C.I. working at Headquarters, Regional Offices etc. according to the rules of F.C.I. by reason of the sanction of the Central Government could make payment of overtime allowances with the rules framed by the F.C.I. The provisions of the said Act, 1963 could not be resorted to for the purpose of claiming the overtime allowances. It is also seriously urged on behalf of the F.C.I. that the Court should take into account the award passed by Sri R.V. Shrivastav, the Presiding Officer, Central Government Kanpur in Industrial Dispute No. 236 of 1988 holding, inter alia, that the Circular directing payment of overtime allowance to the staff working in different offices at the F.C.I. rate and payment of overtime allowance to those members of the Staff of F.C.I. working in different depots and godowns at a higher rate prescribed in Shops & Establishment Act does not make discrimination and the action of F.C.I. in prescribing different rates of overtime allowance is justified in view of different nature of works done by them. The F.C.I. advanced the said arguments in support of its case. 16. The F.C.I. advanced the said arguments in support of its case. 16. Respondent further claimed that the said Act, 1963 is a general statute passed by the State Government in the year, 1963 whereas Food Corporation of India Act, 1964 passed by Parliament in the year 1964. Being a special statute of later date are otherwise application to members of the Staff of F.C.I. Hence, the Food Corporation of India Act, 1964 could be effected in respect of the F.C.I. The said Act, 1963 being in general in nature could not be construed in such manner as would have the effect of overriding the provisions of the said Food Corporation of India Act, 1964 and the provisions of the said Act, 1963 is not applicable the regular employees of the F.C.I. Under those circumstances, the claim of the regular members working in the Headquarter, Regional Offices and Zonal Offices of the F.C.I. are entitled to receive over time allowance by F.C.I. Rules and Regulations with obtained the approval of the Central Government and the regular employees of F.C.I. are, thus, not entitled to get the over time allowance at a higher rate as prescribed by the said Act, 1963. Respondents sought to deal with the decisions cited by the petitioners by contending, inter alia, that the decision reported in 1986(1) SCC 637 (Supra), has no manner of application in the instant case inasmuch as the said case deals with discrimination between casual workers on daily wages basis and regular class IV employees against sanctioned posts. The instant case is concerned with over time allowance paid to employees of F.C.I. working in Railway Sidings, Deposits and Ports whose nature of work is entirely different. 17. Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, while advancing submissions supplemented by the written argument seriously commented on the action of the respondents in refusing the payment of over time allowance for the period between September 14, 1982 and September 14, 1984. Mr. Mukherjee highlighted the basic infirmities that crept in the decision of the Authority, the said basic infirmities are outlined hereinbefore. It is not in dispute that by Notification dated September 14, 1984 as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ application, the State of West Bengal granted an exemption which is quoted above. 18. It is also not in dispute that the said Act extends to the whole of West Bengal. It is not in dispute that by Notification dated September 14, 1984 as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ application, the State of West Bengal granted an exemption which is quoted above. 18. It is also not in dispute that the said Act extends to the whole of West Bengal. Circular dated July 3, 1987, issued by the F.C.I. declared that the staff of administrative office of the Corporation would be treated at par with the staff of the godown and depots for the purpose of payment of overtime allowance in all places where the Corporation has not secured exemption from the provision of the local Act. Here, Mr. Mukherjee led his frontal attack against arbitrary and discriminatory action of the F.C.I. by contending, inter alia, that once Authority of F.C.I. decided the administrative offices of the F.C.I. be treated at par with the staff of the godown and depot for the purpose of payment of overtime allowance in respect of places and region where the State Government did not grant any exemption. There is no escape from the liability. Thus it means on the F.C.I. in requiring to adhere to the said decision thus contained in the Circular dated July, 3, 1987. In support or the said contention, special emphasis was laid on Annexures 'E', 'F' and 'G' of the writ application, for the purpose of showing that the District Manager (South) took up the matter with the Senior Regional Manager, F.C.I. on the question of payment of over time allowance to category of III and IV employees in west Bengal in terms of and in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, 1963 for the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984 whereby it was effectively pointed out by the District Manager. The Head Quarter Staff attached to the districts are connected with the said orders to the depots, that the depot informs their day to day functions to the Head Quarter for reply to the CSC and the regional offices directly, that the movement of stock outside the district, i.e., part operations STC, etc. are performed by the District Staff relating to the depot, that preparation of monthly 29.2. statement for compilation of work, linking on depots on behalf of sidings. are performed by the District Staff relating to the depot, that preparation of monthly 29.2. statement for compilation of work, linking on depots on behalf of sidings. The certification of stocks; issuable or non-issuable for delivery to S.R. is done by the O.C. Staff posted in District Office, that the issue of orders for engagement of labourers to the depots, etc. The District Office is required to perform the operational work, and maintenance and calculation of leave and incentives of the labourers attached to the depots/SDG's of the district. The District Manager recorded that the works related to the depots and sidings and that of Head Quarter are reciprocal in character. Depots and sidings cannot function without the work of the Head Quarter. The request was made by the District Manager that the payment of overtime allowance, any other allowance to the staff, posted at the District Office be extended so as to avoid commotion amongst the staff. 19. Similarly, District Manager (South) also took up the matter with the Senior Regional Manager, FCI, W.B. Region by its letter dated April 22, 1987. 20. The nature of work at District Office is closely related to the work of the siding and depot levels and any bottlenecks or delay in work at District Office will also upset work at the Railway heads and sidings. 21. The work of issuing Delivery Orders, Movement Programming preparation of stock report and such other work is very much related to operational work at the depots and Railway Sidings. 22. The District Office staff are often engaged in escorting of trucks from siding to the depot investigation of transit loss and storage less at the depot, lifting of stocks from godown and other districts of FCI, checking of accounts at the depot, preparation of audit report, consulting reports of the depot & siding offices, compilation of accounts based on depots and siding work and so on which gives them allied character of work as of depot and siding based staff. 23. Reconciliation of truck movement and receipt at the various destination points, issue of invoice between various Districts on movement of stock, rebooking of wagons are also done by the District Office staff. 24. Maintenance and calculation of leave accounts, preparation of overtime and incentive bill of the workers and staff of the depot and siding offices are also done at the District Office. 25. 24. Maintenance and calculation of leave accounts, preparation of overtime and incentive bill of the workers and staff of the depot and siding offices are also done at the District Office. 25. As at depot and siding offices O.T. is allowed as the work of the day cannot be left over similarly O.T. is also granted to the staff at the District Office as it has been considered their work is of such vital nature as cannot be left over without attention on that day. 26. The said letter relates to the payment of over time to category III and IV in the State of West Bengal for the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984, vis-a-vis, the payment of the staff of the Head Office of the District. 27. After indicating the reasons in the manner mentioned above the District Manager recommended staff of the District Office should also be made eligible to get the over time allowance at par with the staff of Railway Sidings and Depots in modification of the order already issued. 28. The District Manager (North) by letter dated 22.4.1987 drew the attention of the Senior Regional Manager, W.B., to the subject-matter of payment of over time allowance under the said Act, 1963 during the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984. The said letter, inter alia, records as under:- The District Manager in conclusion by paragraph of the said letter recommended that the whole matter be considered and the over time allowance under the said Act, 1963 for the period in question be also allowed to the District Office Staff so as to restore normal working atmosphere in the depots and District Offices of F.C.I. 29. The petitioners further claimed that very often the staff attached to the District offices are disputed to offices attached to sidings depots and godowns and vice-versa that Food Corporation of India Manual Volume I, inter alia, specified the duties and functions of different offices. The said provisions contained in the said Manual will clearly show that the clerical staff of the District/Regional Offices and those of the offices attached to Depots sidings and godowns discharge the same or similar nature of duties. Some of relevant provisions for the sake of ready reference are stated as under:- (i) Sub-Clause c(i) of the Clause 2.2. The said provisions contained in the said Manual will clearly show that the clerical staff of the District/Regional Offices and those of the offices attached to Depots sidings and godowns discharge the same or similar nature of duties. Some of relevant provisions for the sake of ready reference are stated as under:- (i) Sub-Clause c(i) of the Clause 2.2. provides that the Corporation will have a District Office to conduct all operations including administration of storage, Depots within a specified area; (ii) Sub-Clause (C) II, III and IV of Clause 2.2. clearly enumerate the function of the District Office -provides that District Office is to manage directly certain storage, depots etc. and to be in-charge of all operational work; (iii) Sub-Clause a(i) of Clause 2.5. clearly defines the functions of the District Offices-The District Office headed by a District Manager is solely entrusted with the task of "Movement of the stocks to the Depots and for their proper storage etc. in the Depots of Food Corporation". "The same clause also provided-"The District Manager will be the full Officer directly in-charge of all the operations of the Food Corporation within the limits of this jurisdiction. (iv) Sub-Clause a(2) of Clause 2.5 further provides-"All payments for purchase, all collections for sales, all bills for the services render etc. will be settled entirely at the District Office." (v) Sub-Clause a(3) of Clause 2.5-further provided-"The District Manager will also exercise such administrative disciplinary powers for the staff employed in his region." 30. The different administrative Offices of F.C.I. particularly the regional offices and District Offices are establishments within the meaning of the said Act, 1963, the F.C.I. has no power authority or jurisdiction to say that the District Offices and Regional Offices would be establishments under the said Act, 1963 from a particular date. If the regional offices and district offices are establishments within the meaning of the said Act and those are so from the date when the Act came into force. The said circular is wholly without authority and beyond the competence and/or jurisdiction of F.C.I. There is no scope for any bona fide dispute that the Regional and District Offices of the F.C.I. clearly come within the meaning and definition of establishment contained in the said Act, 1963. The said circular is wholly without authority and beyond the competence and/or jurisdiction of F.C.I. There is no scope for any bona fide dispute that the Regional and District Offices of the F.C.I. clearly come within the meaning and definition of establishment contained in the said Act, 1963. The circular No. 46 dated 3.7.1987 clearly admits that the authorities of F.C.I. did not have any doubt that the Regional offices and District Offices are being the establishments within the meaning of the said Act and there cannot be any classification or differences as sought to be made by F.C.I. between the staff working in the Regional and District Offices and staff working in the offices attached to Depots, Ports, sidings and godowns. There is reiteration that the said circular is contrary to the said Act, being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unreasonable, unjust, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, without authority, without jurisdiction and competence. The petitioners also reiterate that refusal to pay overtime allowance to the staff of the regional and district offices at the same rate given to the staff working in the offices attached to Godowns, Depots and Sidings also violate the principle of equal pay for equal work and there is no just valid and bona fide reason to refuse payment of overtime allowance to the petitioners at the rate prescribed under the said Act, 1963. 31. The stand of the F.C.I. as detailed is stated hereinbefore. 32. Mr. Sunil Kr. Mitra, the learned Advocate, duly assisted by Mr. A.K. Sen effectively made submission which is engrafted in the written argument. The claim of F.C.I. that the writ petition should not have been accepted or entertained or the ground of delay. It is required to be considered in the contextual perspective as indicated above. The contention of Mr. Mitra is that the Court should not allow such belated claim of the petitioner on the ground of daly which calls for effective consideration. It is well settled rule that the Court may not entertain into belated or stale claims. It is not a rule of law but a rule of practice based on sound and proper exercise of discretion and there is inviolable rule that whenever there is a delay the Court must necessarily refuse to entertain the petitioner. It is well settled rule that the Court may not entertain into belated or stale claims. It is not a rule of law but a rule of practice based on sound and proper exercise of discretion and there is inviolable rule that whenever there is a delay the Court must necessarily refuse to entertain the petitioner. The question is one of the discretion to be followed on the facts of each case. The petitioner made several representations and the recommendations of the District Manager of different zones were also presented to the higher authorities and on that court. The Court will not be justified in throwing out the petitioner on the ground of delay inasmuch as there is no justification in depriving the petitioner of their legitimate rights particularly in view of the Circular mentioned above. In my view the writ petition is not liable to dismiss on the ground of delay. So the objection as taken by the F.C.I. cannot be accepted. The next contention of the F.C.I. that the regular employees of the Head Quarters, Zonal Offices and District Offices and other administrative offices could not claim the payment of overtime allowance according to the existing rules or regulation of F.C.I. i.e. on the same terms and conditions as are applicable to the Central Government employees is to be tested and examined on the basis of the fundamental grievance of the petitioners. The exclusion of the regular employees as mentioned above from the benefit of overtime allowance under the different shops and Establishments Act applicable to different States herein the provisions contained in the said Act, 1963. The said Act, 1963 applies with its own force that the regular employees of F.C.I. who could not claim the said benefit. In the background of the factual aspect of the matter, the plea of F.C.I. cannot be accepted for the sole reason that the District Managers in their recommendations gave graphic account of the performance of the staff, regular employees of the administrative offices, Regional Offices, District and other Offices. Annexures 'E', 'F' and 'G' as are mentioned above establish the regular employees of the staff of the administrative offices discharged the same nature of works as those of the depots and godowns. Annexures 'E', 'F' and 'G' as are mentioned above establish the regular employees of the staff of the administrative offices discharged the same nature of works as those of the depots and godowns. If that be so, the Court cannot accept the hypothetical tests placed by F.C.I. It is also to be borne in my mind that F.C.I. by Circular dated July 3, 1987 declared that the staff of the administrative offices of F.C.I. would be treated at par with the staff of the godown and depot for the purpose of payment of overtime allowance in all places. Therefore, the contention of F.C.I. is that the regular employees of the Head Quarters, Zonal Offices, Regional Offices and District Offices and other administrative offices can only be paid overtime allowance for the period in question on the same terms and conditions as applicable to the Government of India employees cannot be sustained. By reason of clear assertions as would be evident from the recommendation of the District Managers the Court cannot reject the claim of the petitioners that they are to be treated on a different footing by reason of their work in the Head Quarters, Zonal Offices and other District Offices. The determination of the central point does not depend on the ancillary question and collateral objection of F.C.I. When a group of employees perform the same nature of job and discharge similar duties, their rights cannot be whittled down on the mere ipsi dixit of F.C.I. or the Circular or on such basis namely, the provisions of the Rules and Regulations. The rules and regulations cannot flout the Constitutional injunctions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution complimented by Article 39(d). 33. In the event the contentions of F.C.I. are accepted the very foundation of the equality clause would be shaken. Equal pay for equal work in the event of acceptance of the contentions of F.C.I. as regards the non-eligibility of the regular employees for overtime allowance for the period indicated above, equal pay for equal work would become mirage. The absence of reasonable classification constitutes the violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Sweep of Article 14 sets up dynamic concept of equality. Article 14 ensures fairness and equality of treatment. If action is infected with arbitrariness then violence on equality clause is committed. Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness. The absence of reasonable classification constitutes the violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Sweep of Article 14 sets up dynamic concept of equality. Article 14 ensures fairness and equality of treatment. If action is infected with arbitrariness then violence on equality clause is committed. Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness. After taking into account the Circulars, the recommendations of the District Managers, the Court cannot accept the contention as are raised by F.C.I. that the regular employees would be paid overtime allowance for the period in question under the said Act, 1963. The rules and regulations of F.C.I. should not be construed so as to defeat the claims of the petitioners founded upon the provisions of the said Act, 1963 which are applicable by its own strength. The exemptions thus granted to F.C.I. by the State of West Bengal on two occasions means and implies that the F.C.I. cannot act arbitrarily in breach of the provisions of the said Act, 1963. The said Act, 1963 governs the F.C.I. operation of sections 5(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the Act, 1963 was initial exemption. Section 13 of the said Act laying down the provisions for the benefit of overtime allowance was not then exempted, from operation. By the Notification being No. 238-IR dated October 14, 1984 F.C.I. was exempted from the operation of section 13 of the said Act and thereby, they were not obliged to pay overtime allowance from the aforesaid date. The period in question namely, December 1, 1982 and October 14, 1984 is not covered by the said Notification. The F.C.I. acknowledged the liability for the overtime allowance for the employees posted at Head Quarters, Regional Offices, Administrative Offices of the States including the State of W.B. by an executive fiat and hence they are not entitled to refuse the payment of overtime allowance to the staff of administrative offices of FCI. FCI, therefore, cannot be permitted to claim the immunity from the application of the said Act, 1963 would be evident from Annexure 'A' and also Annexure 'B'. Paragraph 2 of the said Circular dated July 3, 1987 admits the liability of F.C.I. in respect of the staff of Administrative Offices. The regular employees, in my view, are entitled to overtime allowance for the year between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984. Paragraph 2 of the said Circular dated July 3, 1987 admits the liability of F.C.I. in respect of the staff of Administrative Offices. The regular employees, in my view, are entitled to overtime allowance for the year between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984. The State Government accorded exemption to F.C.I. from operation of the section 13 of the said Act with effect from September 14, 1984. The claim of the respondents that the Circular dated July 3, 1987 was issued out of grace. The said Act applies in its own force and the petitioners rightly made grievances that they were and are entitled to overtime allowance under the said Act as a matter of right and the claim of the petitioners deriving its strength from the said Act, 1963 and not on the basis of grace. The right to claim overtime allowance constitutes property within the meaning of Article 300A of the Constitution. The petitioners cannot be deprived by the Authority save without the Authority of law. Deprivation of the said right cannot be effected by the Circular and the regulations. In a situation when the said Act, 1963 which accords the exemption is applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case from a date prior to the period in question for which the claim was out forward. Overtime allowance claimed by the petitioners is to be treated a property which includes money. Such right as is claimed by the petitioners cannot be taken away without specific legal authority. F.C.I. and its officers cannot deprive the petitioners of their right to property without the authority of law. Refusal on the part of F.C.I. to accord the said benefit as is indicated as perse legal. The said Circular issued by the F.C.I. is impugned by the petitioners namely, the regular employees are eligible to claim the overtime allowance, in terms of the provisions of the said Act, 1963. The section 13 of the said Act, 1963 read with the West Bengal Shops & Establishments Act, 1964 in the contextual perspective of the facts situation cannot be restricted only to the employees engaged to depots, Railway Sidings, Godowns etc. The section 13 of the said Act, 1963 read with the West Bengal Shops & Establishments Act, 1964 in the contextual perspective of the facts situation cannot be restricted only to the employees engaged to depots, Railway Sidings, Godowns etc. It is also applicable to the regular employees engaged in Regional Offices, Head Quarters, District Offices and administrative offices for the period between December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984 and they could not be denied the benefit of overtime allowance and they are eligible for overtime allowance work in terms of section 13 and the payment shall be computed in terms of Rule 39 of the West Bengal Shops & Establishments Rules. The recommendations of the District Manager, if taken into account, would strengthen the case of the regular employees of Regional Offices, Head Quarters, Administrative Offices. Therefore, the objection of F.C.I, in my view, has had no legal and factual foundations. Reference made by the petitioners to the decision of the Supreme Court in 1986(1) SCC 637 (Supra) are clearly applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The claim of the regular employees of F.C.I. is founded upon the principle of equal pay for equal work which is put in jeopardy by F.C.I. Article 14 of the Constitution comes into play. The equality clause of the Constitution cannot be constituted in such manner as is sought to be done by F.C.I. The said equality clauses must mean something to everyone, as is indicated, to obviate in justice by avoiding discrimination and arbitrariness. If the contention of F.C.I. is accepted, the regular employees of F.C.I. in the Head Quarters, Regional Offices, District Offices and Administrative Offices are bound to sustain the arbitrary treatment in contravention of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Article 14 being complemented by part IV of the Constitutional directives in Article 39 are to be followed. F.C.I. comes within the sweep of the Article 12 of the Constitution. It is an obligation of F.C.I. to implement the fundamental of equal pay for equal work. 34. On careful examination of the totality of the circumstances and the enormity of the situation, this Court is of the view that the claims of the petitioners could not be frustrated and/or defeated on untenable pleas of F.C.I. The award in question for the reason as indicated is not binding upon this Court. 34. On careful examination of the totality of the circumstances and the enormity of the situation, this Court is of the view that the claims of the petitioners could not be frustrated and/or defeated on untenable pleas of F.C.I. The award in question for the reason as indicated is not binding upon this Court. Annexure 'E', 'F' and 'G' of the writ petition are demonstrable. They demonstrate that the regular employees of the Head Quarters, Regional Offices, District Offices and Administrative Offices namely, the petitioners herein in the administrative offices performed the same nature of work as those of godowns, depots, railway sidings. The employees of siding, godowns, and depots are given higher rate of overtime allowance whereas the petitioners are denied the said benefits Article 14 is, thus, utterly breached so far the denial of "equal pay for equal work" a constituted guarantee. The objection of F.C.I. cannot, therefore, be accepted. Petitioners being a Public Sector employees cannot be deprived of their legitimate dues by F.C.I. under the authority of law. 35. The writ petition is allowed. Para 2(1) impugned Circular No. 124 purporting to exclude the regular staff of Head Quarters, Regional Offices, Zonal Offices, District Offices and Administrative Offices of F.C.I. in the State of West Bengal from the benefit of getting over time allowance at the rate prescribed under the said Act, 1963 and letter dated April 9, 1987 issued by Senior Regional Manager, F.C.I., West Bengal as contained in Annexure 'C' stands hereby cancelled. F.C.I. and its officers and subordinates are directed to forebear from giving any effect or further effect to the prohibition or embargo contained in its Circular. The F.C.I. and its authorities are directed to pay over time allowance to the petitioners and staff working in the Regional Offices, and District Offices of F.C.I., West Bengal Region at the rate prescribed under the said Act, 1963 for the period December 1, 1982 and September 14, 1984 within a period of six weeks from date. 36. Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds. There will be no order as to costs. In the event, the application is made, the department shall supply the same within seven days from the date of the deposit of the necessary costs.