PARAS NATH AND ANR. MAMMAN SINGH AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

       PARAS NATH AND ANR. MAMMAN SINGH AND ORS.
                                                                                A
-.                          v.
                 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

                             NOVEMBER 28, 1989

               [RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND                                B
                      K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.)

           Delhi Milk Scheme: Dairy Mates-Junior plant _operatives-semi
     skilled operatives-Grievance-Doing work of skilled workers-But
     classified as unskilled workers and paid salary-Validity of.

            The firsf petition is on behalf of one thousand Dairy Mates and the C
     other on behalf of 280 workers as Junior Plant Operatives and semi-
     skilled Operatives. The grievance of Dairy Mates is that although they
     perform the duties of semi-skilled workers they have been wrongly
     classified as unskilled workers and paid salaries as suclt Similarly the
     grievance of the Junior Plant Operatives and semi-skilled Operatives is D
     that they are actually doing the work of skilled workers but are clas-
     sified as unskilled workers and paid salary as such.

            In view of the disputed questions rel;lting to the nature and func-
     tions of the workmen involved, the Court referred the matter to the
     Central Govt. Industrial Tribm.ial-cum-Labour Court to report to the E
     Court as to what would be appropriate pay scales admissible to the
     concerned workers. On the basis of additional material and evidence
     produced by the workers, the Tribunal made its report and recom-
     mended that taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances,
     the Mates and JPOs may be given the pay scale of Rs.800-1150, the
     semi-skilled operatives may be given the scale"of Rs.825-1200 and the F
     skilled operatives may be given the scale of Rs.950-1400. The Union of
     India criticised the pay scale recommended to the Mates co.i'tending
     that their work was of unskilled nature. Accepting the report of the
     Tribunal while allowing the Petitions in terms of the report, this Court,

           HELD: There is no roster of duties and functions of the Mates in     G
     any Unit and all Mates have to do the work of the Units to which they
     are assigned on any particular day. The Mates have thus to be versatile
     with the work in all the Units, both unskilled and semi-skilled. This is
     certainly not the case with the Sweepers, Chowkidars and Malis who
     are categorised as unskilled workers. This being the case, there is no
     merit in the contention of the Union of India that the Mates should be     H

                                       323
    324           SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [ 1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R.

    treated on par with the unskilled workers. [328C-D I
A
            ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition Nos. 251 & 558 of
    1987.

            (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
B
            R.K. Jain and R.P. Gupta for the Petitioners.

         Kapil Sibal, R.B. Misra, B.B. Sawhney, R.K. Mehta (N.P.) and
    Ms. A. Subhashini for the Respondents.

            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
c
       SAWANT, J. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 251 of 1987
  are Dairy Mates whereas, those in Writ Petition No. 558 of 1987 are
  Junior Plant Operatives and Semi-Skilled Operatives, all working with
  the Delhi Milk Scheme. The first petition is on behalf of about one
D thousand workers, whereas, the second petition is on behalf of about
  280 of workers.
          2. The grievance of the Dairy Mates is that although they
    perform the duties and functions of semi-skilled workers, they have
    been wrongly classified as un-skilled workers and paid salary as such,
    as recommended by the 4th Pay Commission namely, Rs.750-940
E   instead of Rs.800-1150 which is the salary recommended to the semi-
    skilled workers. The grievance of the Junior Plant Operatives and
    Semi-Skilled Operatives is that they are actually doing the work of
    skilled workers, but are classified similarly as unskilled workers and
    paid salary as such. Both, further, have a grievance that their counter-
    parts ifi other departments, particularly in Railways, have been pro-
F   perly classified and are paid salary acc\lrdingly.
           3. The petitions were resisted by the respondent Union of India
    by filing counter affidavits denying the contentions of the petitioners
    that their work was of a semi-skilled or skilled character as alleged.
           4. In view of the disputed questions relating to the nature and
G   functions of the workmen involved, this Court by its order of July 29,
     1988 referred the matter to the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-
    Labour Court, New Delhi to report to the Court on what would be the
    appropriate pay-scales admissible to the concerned workers, after
    looking into the record and giving an opportunity to the parties to
    produce before it such further material as they may desire to do.
H   Pursuant to the order, the Tribunal submitted its report dated October
                 PARAS NATH v. U.0.1. [SAWANT, J.J                325

28, 1988. It appears from the report that the Tribunal had given
                                                                         A
opportunities to both the parties to make additional submissions, if
any, and to file further material which they wished to do. Pursuant to
the opportunity given, the workers in. both the petitions produced
additional material and evidence. The respondent Union of India,
however, did not produce any further material or evidence. On the
basis of the material which was already on record, and the further       B .
material produced before it, the Tribunal made its report. The rele-
vant portions of the report may be reproduced hereunder:
           3. "There are 4 categories of workmen in the DMS viz.
           Dairy Mates, (DM), Junior Plant Operatives (JPO), Semi
            Skilled Operatives (SSO) and Skill.ed Operatives (SO).
           The deployment registers of the varidus units read with the   c
           evidence of Shri Lajpat Rai Saxena Dairy Supervisor, con-
           clusively prove that the various categories of workmen are
           performing similar duties and their positions are inter-
           changeable with the result that there is no clear demar-
           cation as to what function is to be performed by which
           category of workmen. Shri Lajpat Rai Saxena has clearly       D
           stated that the nature of duties and the degree or skill of
            S.O., S.S.O., and J.P.Os and D.Ms is almost same and that
           sometimes the work done by S.S.   Os  is performed by S. O.
           and J.P.Os subject to the availability of the category of
           workmen. To a question by this Tribunal he replied that if
           an S.O. is available he will be posted as an S.O. only but    E
           when no S.O. is available, then S.S.O. is put in his place
           and sometimes J.P. Os arid Dairy Mates may be put to work
           in his place. He further stated that generally there is a
          ·shortage of S.Os and then they have to put other categories
           of workmen in their places. The position is fully borne out
           by the various deployment registers ......... "               F

           4. " ........... The position of deployment of the various
           categories of workmen clearly goes to show that their
           duties are inter-changeable without any consideration for
           their grades/designations. The position obtaining on the
           ground clearly repells the contentions of the respondents     G
           contained in affidavit of Shri K.G. Krishnamurty that the
           functions of the various categories of workmen are distinct
           and separate. The respondents have not been able to pro-
           duce any document in support of their contention to show
           that the -duties of the various categories of workmen as
           enumerated in the affidavit of Shri K.G. Krishnamurty         H.
    326   .SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R.

          were even published or actually followed. On the other
A
          hand, Shri Lajpat Rai Saxena has stated that since the time
          he joined service in the year 1972 he had not come across
          any roster of duties for the different categories of workers
          such as S.O., SSO, JPOs and Mates and no such roster had
          been issued after 1972. He had heard that there was a
B         roster of duties issued prior to his joining of service but he
          had not seen any such roster. It would thus appear that if
          there was any such roster prior to 1972 it got into disuse
          and was never enforced."
          5. "The nature of functions performed by various work-
          men shows that they require a good degree of skill. In other
c         words, the functions can be performed only by skilled and
          semi-skilled workers and· not by unskilled workers. Shri
          Lajpat Rai Saxena has stated that there are 5 milk
          pasteurisers and 2 cream pasteurisers in the plant unit of
          Process Section. There are also two chillers in R.S.M.
          There are 13 machines in the product section. All these
D         machines can be operated only by skilled workers. He
          further stated that the bottle filling plant is automatic and
          the entire working is also automatic. They have got a sepa-
          rate pest control section for cleaning and sweeping. Sweep-
          ers of Pest Control Section are not used for cleaning
          machines which is done only by the SO, SSOs, JPOs and
E         Dairy Mates. This further goes to show that even the clean-
          ing of machines requires skill and the job cannot be
          performed by unskilled workers. Even the Management of
          DMS recognises that the duties performed by the mates
          and junior plant operatives who have been clubbed with
          the unskilled category of peons, chowkidars etc., are much
F         more onerous in nature and they deserve a better deal (see
          the letter dated 4-9-86 addressed by the Chairman D.M.S.
          to the Joint Secretary Ministry of Agriculture). The first
          petitioners have placed on record a photo copy of the
          identity card issued to the mates (page I JO Vol. l) which
          shows that the D. Mates were being treated as Technical
G         Personnel for the purpose of issue of identity cards. The
          job cards annexures 1 to 6 (Vol. II) further go to show that
          the mates have been performing skilled/semi-skilled duties
          such as repairing of Driver seats vulcanising of punctures,
           other repairs of vehicles and servicing. All these jobs could
           not have been done by unskilled workers. Und~r the
H         circumstances, I have no hesitation in holding that the
               PARAS NATH v. U.0.1. (SAWANT, J.)                  327

          mates and junior plant operatives have been unfairly
                                                                          A
          treated by the 4th Pay Commission by giving them lowest
          pay scale of unskilled category of workmen like peons,
          sweepers, chowkidars etc. This category of workmen difini-
          tely deserves to be given a higher grade than the lowest
         meant for unskilled category of workmen. While it may be
         conceded that due to the diffuse nature of duties, the Dairy     B
         Mates and Junior Plant Operatives of OMS cannot be com-
         pared with the Gangmates in the Railways, yet the case of
         the Dairy Mates and Junior Plant Operatives of the OMS
         has intrinsic merit. No doubt the workmen categorised as
          semi-skilled (SSOs) at present are carrying out the func-
          tions of Skilled Operativd (SOs) frequently, yet, so are the
          Mates and JPOs. However, all the workmen cannot be              c
          given lhe grade of SOs because the considerations of career
          planning and promotions etc. have to be kept in view.
          Already it is being represented that the various categories
         of workmen are stagnating in their respective grades for the
          last 20-25 years. The same complaint will arise afterwards if   D
          all the· workmen are given the grades of SO at the same
          time. It also militates against the principles of sound
         .administration because there will be double jumping of
          grades in some category of workmen. It will also not be
          desirable to create any fresh scales of pay as it would run
         counter to ·uie recommendations of the pay commission            E
         which has reduced the number of pay scales prevailing
          previously.''

          6. "Taking into consideration all the facts and circum-
          stances, it is recommended that the Mates and JPOs may
          be given the pay scale of Rs.800-1150 and semi-skilled
          operatives may be given the scale of Rs.825-1200. The           F
          grades as provided by the 4th Pay Commission and those
          now recommended by this Tribu,nal will compare as under:
SI. No. Category of workmen       Pay Scale      Pay Scale '
                                  recommended by recommendecl
                                  4th Pay        by this                  G
                                  Commission     Tribunal
1.     Skilled Operatives (SO)    950-1150          950-1400
2.     Semi-Skilled Operatives    800-1150          825-1200
       (SSO)
                                                                          H
3.     Mates/JPOs                 750-940           800-1150."
    328         SUPREME COURT REPORTS              I1989] Supp. 2 S.C.R.
          5. While the workmen accepted the report, arguments were
A   advanced on behalf of the respondent mainly criticising the report with
    regard to the pay-scales recommended to the Mates deployed in Trans-
    port (Distribution Section). It was contended that the Mates working
    in the said section constituted 60% of the total number of Mates
    deployed in the different units of the Scheme, and their work merely
B   consisted of loading and unloading of the crates. That work by no
    stretch of imagination could be described as other than unskilled. It
    was, therefore, wrong to give them a scale different from that admissi-
    ble to the unskilled workers. This contention ignores the admitted fact
    that Mates from one Unit are transferable to another at any time, and
    when so transferred they do the work of the Units to which they are
    transferred without any additional remuneration. What is more as is
c   stated in the report, there is no roster of duties and functions of the
    Mates in any Unit, and all Mates have to do the work of the Units to
    which they are assigned on any particular day. The mates have thus to
    be versatile with the. work in all the Units, both unskilled and semi-
    skilled. This is certainly not the case with the Sweepers, Chowkidars
D   and Malis who are categorised as unskilled workers. This being the
    case, we do not see any merit in the contention that the Mates should
    be treated on par with the unskilled workers.
         6. There was no contention raised on the report with regard to
    the mates working in the other Units or with regard to the Junior Plant
    Operatives and Semi-Skilled Operatives.
E
         7. In the circumstances, we accept the report and direct the
    respondent to pay to the workers the pay scales recommended in the
    report which are as follows:
          A. Mates and Junior Plant Operatives            Rs.800-1150
F         B. Semi-Skilled Operatives                      Rs.825- 1200

         8. The above pay scales should come into effect from Ist
    January, 1990.
          9. It is made clear that none of the workers i.e. Mates, Junior
    Plant Operatives and Semi-Skilled Operatives will refuse to do any
G   part of the work which is assigned to th.em at present merely because
    they are hereby given the above pay scales.

           10. Writ Petitions are allowed accordingly. The parties to bear
    their own costs.
H                                                        Petitions allowed.
    R.N.J.