Holding

Regularisation and equal pay for equal work apply only when a daily-rated workman performs the same duties as a regular workman and a vacancy exists; absent a vacancy, the petitioners are not entitled to regularisation.

Summary

The petitioners, daily-rated workmen of National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., filed a writ seeking regularisation and equal pay for equal work, alleging they performed the same duties as regular employees. The respondents contended that there was no work or vacancy for the petitioners, who were retained on the rolls merely on humanitarian grounds, and offered a voluntary retirement scheme instead. The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition, finding the petitioners surplus to the establishment with no vacancy for absorption. On special leave, the Supreme Court affirmed that regularisation and equal pay arise only when a daily-rated worker performs the same work as a regular worker and a vacancy exists. Since no vacancy existed, the petitioners were not entitled to regularisation, but the Court directed that all 63 daily-rated workers be given the benefit of the voluntary retirement scheme and paid the specified amounts. Consequently, the special leave petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether daily-rated workmen are entitled to regularisation and equal pay for equal work in the absence of a vacancy.
Whether the principle of "equal pay for equal work" applies when the workmen are surplus to the establishment.
Whether the petitioners can be compelled to be absorbed as regular employees despite lack of work.
Whether offering a voluntary retirement scheme is an appropriate remedy.

Subjects

regularisationdaily-rated workmenequal pay for equal workvacancyvoluntary retirement schemelabour law

Judgment

SATYANARAYAN SHARMA M'D ORS.
A v.
NATIONAL MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
LTD. AND ORS. ·-0
AUGUST 6, 1990

[L.M. SHARMA, J.S. VERMA AND K. JAYACHANDRA
REDDY, JJ.)

Labour and Services: Daily-rated workmen-Principle of regu- ~"'!--
/arisation-When arises-'Equa/ pay for eq1<a/ work'-Doctrinl!-
Applicability of
c
The petitioners, claiming to be daily-rated workmen of the
respondent Corporation in a writ before the High Court demanded
regularisation of their services and equal pay for equal work on the
ground that they were discharging the same duties as the regular work- _..,..
ers. Their claim was contested by the respondents on the ground that
D there was no work for them for a lopg time and they had been continued
on rolls on humanitarian grounds. The High Court rejected their claim.
In their counter affidavit to the special leave petition it was stated
on behalf of the respondents that there was no vacancy in the establish-
ment to absorb the petitioners, that they were surplus to the require-
f: ment of the project and that it had propgsed a scheme of voluntary
retirement for their benefit which some of them had accepted. )...__.

Dismissing the special leave petition, the Court,
HELD: I. The principle of regularisation of a daily-rated work-
men and payment to him of the pay equal to that of a regular workman
F arises only when he is doing the same work as the regular workman and
there being a vacancy available for him, he is not absorbed against it or ........
not even paid the equal pay for the period during which the same work
is taken from him. [620E-FJ "'-
2. In the instant case, there were no vacancies or work available
in the establishment for absorption of the petitioners. The question of
G directing their absorption and regularisation, therefore, does not arise.
However, they be given the benefit of the voluntary retirement scheme
and paid the specified amounts in addition to other dues. [619H; 620A; GI
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition
(Civil) No. 12317 of 1987.
,- -
'
H
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.9.1987 of the Madh~a
618
SATYANARAYAN v. N.M.D.C 619

-,,>-Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 3308of1985.
A
M.K. Ramamurthy and A.K. Sanghi for the Petitioners.

Vinod Bobde, P.S. Nair and K.V. Sreekumar for the Respondents.

The following Order of the Court was delivered B

This 0 p~tition for special leave is against the judgment dated
2. 9 .1987 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissing the petitioners'
writ petition (M.P. No. 3308 of 1985). The petitioners demand
regularisation of their services claiming to be daily-rated workmen for
a long time in the mines of the Diamond Mining Project, Panna of the
National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. Their demands are
c
of regularisation and "equal pay for equal work" on the ground that
they are discharging the same duties as the regular workers. The man-
agement has throughout denied the petitioners' claim and alleged that,
in fact, the petitioners have been continued on rolls on humanitarian
grou_nds for several years, even though there is no work for them; and D
as such, there is no question of regularising the petitioners and giving
them the pay of regular workers when in fact they are not doing any
work for a long time.

The High Court rejected the petitioners' claim and came to the
following conclusion: E

"The petitioners are not regular employees, they do not
have any specific job to do, they are surplus to the
establishment and merely kept on the roll on humanitarian
ground. The respondents are also running in heavy losses
during the last three years and it is not possible to absorb F
the petitioners immediately as regular workmen. In fact,
the petitioners are being paid their daily wages in spite of
their being no work available for them."

Aggrieved by dismissal of the writ petition, the petitioners have filed
this petition for special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the G
Constitution.

In response to notice of this petition, a counter-affidavit has been
filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 reiterating the stand taken before
the High Court. It has been stated therein that there is no vacancy in
the establishment to absorb the petitioners and the accumulated loss to H
620 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 3 S.C.R.

the establishment as on 31st March, 1988 is Rs.10,29,40,583. A copy of
A the balance sheet has also been enclosed with the counter-affidavit. It · ~~
has been stated that the petitioners being surplus to the requirement of
the Project, they cannot be regularised and their retention on the rolls
is purely on humanitarian grounds so far. Further facts have been
stated in support of their contention. It Ms also been stated that a
B Voluntary Retirement Scheme offering considerable amount to these
daily-rated workmen has been framed, which is Annexure R-V to the
counter affidavit. This document shows -the amount of retrenchment
compensation and the ex-gratia payment offered to the 63 daily-rated ~~~
workmen under this Scheme. The 54 petitioners are included therein.
It was stated at the hearing before us that 9 out of these 63 daily-rated
workers mentioned in Annexure R-V have accepted this Scheme of
c Voluntary Retirement and respondent No. 2 is prepared to give
benefit of the same even to those who may not have agitated their
claim. _...,-

We do not find any ground to interfere with the High Court's
D decision in view of the clear findings supported by evidence that there
are no vacancies or work available in the establishment for absorption
of the petitioners and that for quite some time they have been con-
tinued on rolls and paid in spite of there being no work for them. On
these facts, the question of directing their absorption and regularisa-
tion does not arise. The principle of regularisation of a daily-rated ')...,,
E workman and payment to him of the pay equal to that of a regular
workman arises only when the daily-rated workman is doing the same
work as the regular workman and there being a vacancy available for
him, he is not absorbed against it or not even paid the equal pay for the
period during which the same work is taken from him. On the clear
findings in this case, this is not the position. This petition must, there- I"~
F fore, fail.

In spite of our above conclusion, keeping in view the offer made
on behalf of respondent No. 2 in the counter-affidavit together with
Annexure R-V thereto which was reiterated at the hearing before us,
we direct that all the 63 daily-rated workmen including the 54 petition-
G ers herein mentioned in the aforesaid Annexure R-V to the counter-
affidavit be given the benefit of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme
framed by respondent No. 2 and they be paid the specified amounts in
addition to their all other dues. Subject to this direction, the special
leave petition is dismissed. No costs.

P.S.S. Petition dismissed.