Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2010 DIGILAW 84 (SC)

Food Corporation of India v. Bijoy Kumar Singh

2010-01-14

A.K.GANGULY, G.S.SINGHVI

body2010
ORDER : 1. These appeals filed by the Food Corporation of India (for short "the Corporation") and its functionaries against orders dated 4.4.2003 and 10.9.2003 passed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in CC No. 51/2002 are part of the chain of litigation involving workers, who have not been paid their dues for years together. 2. In the first round of litigation, the Division Bench of the High Court directed the Corporation to pay to the workers salary at par with other casual employees. Civil Appeal No. 1237/1994 filed by the Corporation was dismissed by this Court on March 29, 2004. If the Corporation had implemented the order of the Division Bench, the grievance of the workers would have been partially remedied but, as is usually done by large number of agencies/instrumentalities of the State, the Corporation did not pay wages due to the workers in accordance with the Court’s order leaving them with no option but to again seek intervention of the High Court. Writ Petition No. 1491/1997 filed by 59 workers was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of the High Court on 23.6.1998 by directing the Corporation and its functionaries to pay them wages of Class-IV staff latest within three months. The operative part of that order reads as under: "Under the circumstances of the case, the writ application is allowed. Let a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the Food Corporation of India authorities including the District Manager, Bankura to pay wages of the writ petitioners including arrears at par with the wages of the Class-IV staff of the Food Corporation of India as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than 3 months from date." 2. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal preferred by the Corporation and reduced the time fixed by the learned Single Judge from three months to two months. The appellants carried the matter to this Court and succeeded in persuading the Bench hearing the special leave petition to grant leave. However, they failed to cross the final hurdle, inasmuch as Civil Appeal Nos.6064-6065 of 1998 were dismissed on 28th September, 2000 with costs of Rs.10,000/-. The appellants carried the matter to this Court and succeeded in persuading the Bench hearing the special leave petition to grant leave. However, they failed to cross the final hurdle, inasmuch as Civil Appeal Nos.6064-6065 of 1998 were dismissed on 28th September, 2000 with costs of Rs.10,000/-. Some of the observations made by the two Judges Bench, which are reflective of the mind-set of the functionaries of the Corporation in prosecuting litigation involving those who are at the lowest rung in the hierarchy of services, are extracted below: "Further, the High Court had given a finding that since some casual workers appointed directly by the appellant and some employed by the contractors are working in the same godown and on the same work there could not be any scope for making any difference and to deny equal pay for equal work. Proceeding further, it was stated that on the principles set out earlier with reference to the letter of the Labour Department, the wages will have to be paid regularly to the respondents at the same rate at which it was paid to the regular employees of the appellant doing identical work which has to be worked out on daily rate basis from March, 1989. This was the order that was affirmed by this Court and was not interfered with. It is difficult for us to comprehend on what basis the appellant can make any complaint now except to engage themselves in nit picking and being over ingenious in making submissions before the Court. The position is, therefore, clear to the effect that this appeal is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed with costs, quantified at Rs.10,000/-." 3. Even though the direction given by the learned Single Judge was unequivocal and the same was approved by the Division Bench and this Court, the Corporation and its functionaries did not implement the same necessitating initiation of the proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which have culminated in the impugned orders. 4. After making some submissions on the merits of the impugned orders and finding that the Court is not inclined to interfere with the same, Mr. Ajit Pudussery, learned counsel appearing for the appellants made a request that his client may be given two months’ time to implement the directions given by the High Court. 4. After making some submissions on the merits of the impugned orders and finding that the Court is not inclined to interfere with the same, Mr. Ajit Pudussery, learned counsel appearing for the appellants made a request that his client may be given two months’ time to implement the directions given by the High Court. He also submitted that the respondents and legal representatives of those who died during the pendency of the litigation, will be paid salary and arrears in Scale No.II as revised from time to time. 5. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel, the appeals are disposed of in the following terms: a. Within two months, the appellant-Corporation and its functionaries shall fix the pay of the respondents as also of the deceased workers, who were petitioners in the first and/or second cases filed in the High Court, in Scale No.II, as revised from time to time. (As on 1.1.1997, the scale was Rs.4320 7330). b. The respondents and legal representatives of the deceased workers shall also be entitled to increments and other allowances payable to Class-IV employees of the Corporation. c. The arrears shall be paid to the respondents and legal representatives of the deceased workers within next two months. d. Within the aforesaid period of four months, benefit of further revision of pay scales must also be extended to the respondents and legal representatives of the deceased workers. e. Such of the workers who have retired from service during the penency of litigation and legal representatives of those who died during the pendency of litigation should be given retiral benefits, if any, admissible to them under the regulations framed by the Corporation. f. All the payments shall be made to the respondents and legal representatives of the deceased workers directly without involving any contractor and other agency. g. The sentence awarded to the officers of the Corporation including those who have retired shall remain suspended for a period of four months. If the pay of the respondents-deceased workers is fixed in Scale No.II and they are paid all their dues, then the sentence awarded to the officers of the Corporation including the retired officers shall stand set aside. If, on the other hand, the Corporation and its functionaries fail to implement this order, the directions given by the High Court shall automatically become operative. If, on the other hand, the Corporation and its functionaries fail to implement this order, the directions given by the High Court shall automatically become operative. h. The parties are left to bear their own costs. 6. The interlocutory applications for impleadment and discharge of the advocate are allowed.