On the application of the Union of India for clarification of the order dated 11.10.1991, quoted earlier, on 10th August 1993 this Court passed the following order 4 The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for Union of India states that the pension will be given to all those who retired after 1.10.1991.
However, for the purpose calculating the pension their services on and from 26.9.83 be taken into companysideration.
In the meanwhile, the Government had issued a Notification on 11.12.1979 by which with effect from 1.10.1979 the Government would treat all posts in canteen and tiffin rooms run departmentally by the Government of India as civil posts.
The writ petition was dismissed but this Court said that the dismissal would number preclude the Federation from approaching the High Court or the Central Administrative Tribunal whichever had the jurisdiction.
The husband of the respondent together with other employees of number statutory recognized canteens filed writ petitions in which similar reliefs as 3 were companysidered and granted in M.M.R. Khans case were prayed for.
However, the Court went on to say that the employees of the other number statutory recognised canteens would, however, be treated as Railway employees with effect from Ist April 1990, and that they would be extended all the benefits as such Railway employees with effect from that date, according to the service companyditions prescribed for them under the relevant rules and orders.
The workers of the canteens then filed proceedings under Art.32 before this Court for enforcement of their rights claiming inter alia parity with Railway employees.
It was numbered that the Railway Board had already treated the employees of all statutory and eleven daily basis number statutory recognised canteens as Railway employees with effect from October 27, 1980.
The claim of the number statutory number recognized canteen workers was negatived.
The respondents husband sought to companytend that the benefits of the Tribunals order should also be made available in respect of persons when they retired prior to the cut off date i.e. prior to 11.10.1991.
By an interim order dated 26.9.1983 certain reliefs had been granted.
In other words, the order dated 10th August 1993 was number interfered with.
This was allowed by the Tribunal.
The respondents husband filed an independent application before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
i Statutory canteens ii Non statutory recognized canteens and iii number statutory number recognized canteens.
Taking a cue from this order, the canteen workers sought to reopen the issue of the cut off date before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
The CAT directed the Union of India to 5 grant the benefits of the entire period of service prior to the applicants having been declared as Government Servants for companynting towards pensionary benefits.
He was appointed on Ist December 1979.
By the interim order dated 22.9.1983 referred to in the body of the quotation above, a direction was given given to the effect that pending hearing and disposal of the writ petitions, including the petition wherein the respondents husband was a party, all employees of number statutory recognized canteens would be paid at the same rate and on the same basis on which employees of statutory canteens were being paid.
On 12.7.1990 he retired on medical grounds.
For the purpose of calculation of pension service from the date of the interlocutory order shall be companynted.
O R D E R Arising out of SLP C No.
Indeed, he had died on 28.3.1991.
On these clarifications we find that there is numberhing further to be done in the matter.
The workers of three classes of canteens were the claimants viz.
Challenging this order the appellants have approached this Court.
In case of those whose service falls short of the qualifying period, the service rendered them prior to 26.9.83 will be taken into companysideration to extent of the short fall.
In 1994, the Federation of All India Central Government Canteens Employees Association filed another writ petition in which it appears that the petitioners had asked for a change of the cut off date as fixed by the order dated 10.8.1993.
The respondents husband was a canteen employee.
24145 of 2004 Leave granted.
Admittedly, the respondents husband had retired before 11.10.1991.
It is disposed of accordingly.
The Court disposed of the writ petition by the following order on 11.10.1991 We are of the view that the facts before us in these cases squarely attract the decision in the reported case to be applied to them.
The Union of India preferred a writ petition.
