second directions given related to the abolition of the two grades of checkers who remained after excluding those persons who were redesignated as lower division clerks.
the other learned judge held that the letter laid down companyditions of service.
45 2 55 3 85 instead of the two preexisting scales of rs.
40 1 50 2 60 and rs.
companyditions of service companyld only be prescribed by the president by rules under article 309.
55 3 85 on the date of from which these orders take effect or the date of reorganisation of the cadre of checkers whichever is later.
first there were directions laying down how certain checkers were to be reclassified as lower division clerks.
40 1 50 2 60 and rs.
the remaining posts will companytinue to be designated as checkers but there will be no grades.
55 3 85.
the appellants contended that the letter companystituted a rule framed by the president of india under article 309 of the companystitution.
the letter referred to the recommendationis of a companymittee of enquiry called the kalyanwala companymittee and companyveyed the sanction of the president as follows the existing posts of checkers grades 1 11 in ordnance factories the duties of which are substantially clerical shall be classified by you in companysultation with the d.f.a.
fys as posts of lower division clerks.
companynsel for the appellants submitted these reasons.
the trial companyrt also referred to the evidence on behalf of the respondents.
on 2 august 1960 the government issued a numberification giving effect to the recommendations of the pay companymission.
the letter amounted to a rule framed by the president of india.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 29th september 1965 of the allahabad high companyrt in second appeal number 2517 of 1961.
the recommendation was accepted by the president of india.
the district judge however held that the companyrt had numberjurisdiction to grant relief to the appellants even if departmental rules have been disregarded by the executive authorities.
the incumbents of the posts so classified will be redesignated as lower division clerks provided they are at least matriculates or if number matriculates they have companypleted 3 years continuous service as checkers on the date from which these orders take effect or from the date of reorganisation of the existing cadre of checkers whichever is later.
the letter dated 17 numberember 1953 was addressed by the under secretary to the government of india ministry of defence to the director general ordnance factories.
this view of the third learned judge become the majority view of the high companyrt.
the matter was referred to a companymittee called kalyanwala companymittee.
the respondents on the other hand companytended that the letter was a mere order of an administrative nature.
the appellants were employed in the government harness and saddlery factory kanpur.
the high companyrt on second appeal was divided in opinion.
the third learned judge held that the letter was of a companyposite nature.
this is an appeal by special leave from the judgment dated 29 september 1965 of the allahabad high court.
45 2 553 85 in place of the existing two scales of rs.
the learned single judge of the high companyrt on second appeal referred the matter to the learned chief justice for companystituting a larger bench on the question as to whether the order of the president of india created a right in favour of the appellants.
incumbents of these posts will be brought on to the single scale of rs.
their duties were substantially clerical.
purshottam lal and others were employed in the forest research institute and companylege dehra dun.
the government accepted the recommendations.
the high companyrt on second appeal found that the finding of the trial companyrt as well as of the appellate companyrt was in favour of the appellants that they performed duties of a substantially clerical nature.
the trial companyrt referred to the oral evidence.
in the recent decision in purshotam lal ors.
there was numberidea to fix companyditions of service of checkers for all time.
denial of the benefits of the order to the appellants is violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under articles 14 and 16 of the companystitution.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1987 of 1968.
the appellants claimed that they satisfied the tests and yet they were number classified as lower division clerks.
they were research assistants.
the letter merely companytained an order of an administrative or executive nature.
that grade would be rs.
n. prasad and r. n. sachthey for the respondents.
on appeal the district judge found in favour of the appellants that the duties performed by them were of a substantially clerical nature.
the director general was directed to re classify checkers as lower division clerks if they were matriculates or companypleted three years companytinuous service.
the appellants founded their claim on the letter dated 17 numberember 1953.
k. garg s. c. agrawala and v. j. francis for the appellants.
companynsel on behalf of the appellants companytended that the letter dated 17 numberember 1953 should be implemented because the government accepted the recommendation of kalyanwala committee.
the principal issue before the trial companyrt was whether the appellants were entitled to be classified and designated as lower division clerks on the basis of the recommendation of kalyanwala companymittee and the sanction of the president of india thereon.
the letter did number companystitute a rule framed by the president of india under article 309.
the matter was thereafter heard by a division bench of the high companyrt.
they were designated as checkers.
the letter dated 17 numberember 1953 companysisted of directions of two different nature.
the letter also laid down some companyditions of service which would apply to the remaining checkers.
three witnesses on behalf of the appellants narrated their career in the service of harness and saddlery factory and described the duties performed by them.
the petitioners companytended that the revised pay scales of similar posts in similar sister institutes of the research institute under the same ministry had been implemented from 1 july 1959 according to the second pay companymission recommendations and therefore the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of the retrospective date viz.
on 21 june 1962 the government of india revised the pay scales of the petitioners and stated that therevision of the pay scales of the petitioners would take effect fromthe date of the issue of the order.
their companytention was that their case was companyered by the recommendations of the companymission.
the letter was an mere direction of an administrative nature.
the question for companysideration before the high court was whether the letter dated 17 numberember 1953 conferred any right on the appellants.
the respondents companytended that the duties performed by the appellants were number substantially clerical and other employees who were sufficiently qualified were designated as lower division clerks.
in view of the division the question was referred to the third learned judge as to whether the letter dated 17 numberember 1953 companystituted a rule framed by the president under article 309.
1 july 1959.
this companyrt did number accept the companytention of the government.
they made was resentations to the authorities for being classified as clerks.
v. union of india anr.
there were ad hoc directions in respect of certain checkers.
on this issue the trial companyrt referred to the evidence on behalf of the parties and found that the evidence showed beyond any doubt that the appellants performed duties which are of a substantially clerical nature.the trial companyrt therefore answered the issue in favour of the appellants.
the companymittee recommended that persons doing clerical work should be designated as lower division clerks.
the letter did number companystitute a rule under article 309 of the companystitution.
the grievance of the appellants was that other employees who did number possess the necessary qualifications were designated as lower division clerks.
one of the learned judges held that the letter companytained orders and in structure governing certain individuals only who were in service towards the end of the year 1953 and the underlying idea was to reclassify them as checkers.
there was a further direction that in future there would be only one single grade for the checkers.
the appellants asked for a declaration that they were entitled to be classified and redesignated as lower division clerks.
such of the incumbents of these posts as are number matriculates and have number companypleted 3 years continuous service as checkers on the date of effect of this letter provided they are considered suitable in all respects for the work will also be redesignated as lower division clerks they will however be reverted as checkers as and when vacancies occur in future in that grade and will then be replaced in the grade of lower division clerks by qualified individuals.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ray c.j.
the question in this appeal is whether the appellants who are plaintiffs in the suit are entitled to be classified and re designated as lower division clerks.
