Sri P Chinnabha, vs Sri Tirumala Tirupati ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2548 AP

                                1




       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU
                  WRIT PETITION No.292 of 2021
ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a

direction to the respondents for granting Minimum Time Scale

attached to the post.

The petitioners all claim to be rendering service in a

group of seven temples, controlled by the 1st respondent. The

group of temples are arrayed as respondents 2 and 3.

The petitioners' case as argued by the learned counsel for

the petitioners is that they have been working as Music

Instrument Players (Melam) and as attenders since many years

and are rendering services to the 2nd and 3rd respondent

clusters which are under the control of 1st respondent. Stating

that they are rendering continuous perennial service they have

approached this Court praying for Minimum Time Scale. It is

also stated that their services were recognized and they were

permitted to form into a society for the purpose of being

awarded the work on nomination basis. It is also submitted

that the services rendered by the petitioners are in the

knowledge of the respondents and they were actively

encouraged to continue their services. It is also urged that the

existing societies were all merged into a single society so as to

facilitate the working. Lastly, learned counsel submits that the

1st respondent itself had considered their representation and

recommended the granting of Minimum Time Scale to the

petitioners. Basing on this recommendation learned counsel

for the petitioners argued that the respondents are bound to

give the Minimum Time Scale to them in line with the other

employees who were rendering the similar services. Learned

counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India reported in State of Punjab v Jagjit

Singh and Others1 to support his submissions.

In reply to this, on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, a counter

affidavit is filed. Sri A. Sumanth, learned standing counsel for

Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam, argued in line with what is

mentioned in the counter. It is argued that the petitioners were

merely engaged on "outsourcing basis" through a society /

Contractor. Therefore, he argues that there is no employer

employee relationship between the petitioners and the

respondents. He also argues that the society is not a party to

the proceedings and in the alternative the contract given to the

society also expires in June, 2021. The legal submission of the

learned standing counsel is that the citation relied upon by the

petitioners viz., the case of Jagjit Singh case (1 supra) will

not apply to the facts of this case. Therefore, learned standing

counsel argues that the petitioners are not entitled to the relief

as prayed for.

After perusing the records and hearing the submissions

this Court is of the opinion that there is no strict denial of many

(2017) 1 SCC 148

of the facts that are urged. Petitioners have been rendering

services since many years. Their services are virtually of

perennial nature and are also necessary for the smooth

functioning and the religious ceremonies of the temples. It is

a fact that the petitioners were engaged through a society. The

minutes of the meeting filed show that in August, 2010 itself

the society called the Tiruchanoor Sri Padmavathi Ammavari

Alaya Mariyu Anubandha Alayala Contract Melam Sibbandi

Welfare Society, Tiruchanoor, was formed. They were given the

work of performing melam services on a nomination basis by

Resolution No.63, dated 23.08.2010, of the 1st respondent.

Later, it transpires that another society called Sri Padmavathi

Sametha Venkateswara Swamy Welfare Society was formed.

Even this society was awarded the work on a nomination basis

for Sri Padmavathi Ammavari temple and four other temples.

Thereafter, (the note file filed along with the Writ Petition) TTD

higher authorities themselves has taken a decision that the six

existing societies should be regrouped and formed into two

separate societies - one for religious purpose and the other for

non-religious purpose. The note file reveals that all the existing

societies were directed to be regrouped and formed as one

single society. The society for non-religious functions

consisting of 40 members has been formed as the "Tiruchanoor

Sri Padmavathi Ammavari Alaya Mariyu Anubhandha Alayala

Contract Melam Sibbandhi Welfare Society, Tiruchanoor. The

financial implications for regrouping and the formation of new

society were also considered. The orders were invited for

regrouping and to execute a fresh agreement with the new

society. This was approved. A copy of the latest agreement

has also been filed as an additional document. This is executed

between the above mentioned society and the 1st respondent.

It is expiring on 30.06.2021.

Therefore, it is clear that one looks behind the veil it is

clear that the services of the petitioners were being engaged for

more than a decade and that they are rendering continuous

services which are essential for the religious and the non-

religious functions of the temples. The allotment of duties for

the period is also filed as a material document. In the period

June to December, 2020 the allotment of duties at the temples

is clearly mentioned. Thus, it is clear that the services of the

petitioners are continuously being utilized by the 1st to 3rd

respondents. Their active role in formation, regrouping of the

societies and awarding the work on nomination basis makes it

clear that the 1st to 3rd respondents themselves need and want

the services of the petitioners.

Lastly, the letter dated 18.10.2019 of the Executive

Officer of the 1st respondent makes it clear that the Board of

the 1st respondent had recommended a detailed study for

payment of Minimum Time Scale even to the outsourcing

workers. Although two years has expired till date it is clear

that no conclusion was reached. The counter affidavit filed in

paragraph 5 states that the issue is still under examination.

In the opinion of this Court, more than adequate time has been

taken.

A reading of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

of India in the case of Jagjit Singh case (1 supra) shows in

paragraph 57 the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India was

considering the case of the "contractual employees" also. All

the employees, including the contractual employees, were held

to be entitled to equal pay for equal work. Also in paragraph

52 the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that the concerned

employees would be entitled to minimum of the pay scale, of

the category to which they belong, but they would not be

entitled to the allowances attached to the said post. In that

view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the

petitioners are entitled to be paid the Minimum Time Scale

attached to the post held by them with effect from October,

2019 when the matter was referred to the Committee for a

decision. This Court had to adopt a date to award the

minimum time scale. Since the 1st respondent itself has

chosen to refer the matter to a Committee in October, 2019,

but the Committee has still not taken a decision, this Court is

of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to an order as

prayed for payment of Minimum Time Scale with effect from 1st

November, 2019. The arrears are to be paid in three months

and they shall be regularly entitled to a Minimum Time Scale

as long as their services are being utilized. The claim for

interest etc., is negatived.

With the above observation the Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications, if any,

pending shall stand closed.

__________________________ D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU, J

Date:23.07.2021.

Ssv