Naval Printing Press Wokers' ... vs Union Of India And Another
2001 Latest Caselaw 632 Del

ORDER

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J.

1. This writ petition is filed by the Union representing the Naval Printing Press Employees. It is stated in the writ petition that the members of the Union have been continuously working for 5 to 11 years with the respondent/Press in their respective posts and they are being paid salary only of a consolidated amount. It is alleged that neither they are being regularised in service nor they are being paid equal pay as being paid to the regular employees of the Indian Navy doing similar work.

2. In support of the contention that the members of the petitioner union have been working in the aforesaid press for several years some appointment letters have been placed on record. It is stated in one of such appointment letters that the concerned employee was appointed on a consolidated pay initially on a probation period. He upon regularisation was also to be paid a consolidated pay. The said order of appointment was on the letter head of Naval Printing Press but was signed by Lt. Cdr., Officer in charge Naval Printing Press. It was stated in the said order that the place of posting would be Naval Printing Press, 'A' Block Hutments, New Delhi or any other place if the press is shifted due to administrative expediency. The aforesaid terms and conditions of the appointment were also accepted by all the employees and they are bound by the same. It is alleged in the petition that although members of the Union whose particulars have been given in Annexure P-2 to the writ petition have been working for a long time neither their services have been regularised not they are being paid a regular pay scale. They are being paid a consolidated amount and, therefore, a claim is made for payment of equal pay which is being paid to other employees doing similar work.

3. The respondents have filed a consolidated counter affidavit contending inter alia that the employees of the Naval Printing Press which is being managed out of the Non-public fund are not government employees. It is further stated that they are neither defense personnel nor defense civilian employees and that they are not paid their salaries out of defense service estimates. It is further stated that the said workers are not paid out of non-public fund and that they are not recruited against any regular government vacancies and also that they are not employees of the Union of India. In the light of the aforesaid it was stated that the writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

4. In support of the aforesaid contention the respondents have in their counter affidavit given detailed facts regarding the status of Naval Printing Press (NPP) where the petitioners are working. It is stated that the NPP is a Regimental Press of Naval Headquarters being managed out of Non-public Fund. It is stated that the basic aim of establishing of the Naval Printing Press is to ensure utmost security and quicker execution of job. Printing of jobs are carried at the rates fixed by Board of Officers appointed by Director of Administration and the funds generated there from are utilised for payment of salaries to the staff, payment of bonus, leave, medical, uniform, PPF contributing for the staff, encashment of leave, gratuity, conveyance allowance, maintenance of equipment and creation of new facilities. It is also stated that since the press is under the administrative control of Director of Administration, Naval Headquarters one officer ex officio has ben detailed to look after the administrative & financial matters of the press. It is further stated that since the said employees are not government employees and they are being paid from a Non-public Fund being administered by Officer in charge, Naval Printing Press, therefore, the plea that they should be paid equal pay as that of the other Naval personnel is without any merit. It goes on to state that the scales of pay claimed by the employees of the petitioner Union are scales applicable only to defense civilians being paid from the defense Service Estimates and the same cannot be made available to the Naval Printing Press employees being paid from a Non-public Fund.

5. In the light of the aforesaid pleadings, I am required to consider as to whether the petitioners are entitled to any relief in the present petition. I am also required to consider the objection of the respondents that the NPP is neither a State agency nor any other authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It is crystal clear from the records that the printing press employees were not appointed by the Union of India nor they are being paid their salary out of public fund. The appointment letters placed on behalf of the petitioners indicate that the said appointments were made by the in charge of the Naval Printing Press. It is also categorically stated in the counter affidavit filed that payment of salaries and other allowances to the press employees are met out of the funds generated from printing of jobs.

6. In view of the aforesaid statements and in absence of any convincing material to prove to the contrary I am satisfied that the Naval Printing Press is managed out of Non-public Fund. I am also satisfied that the employees were never appointed by the Union of India and that they are paid their consolidated salary and allowances from out of Non-public Funds. Therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable, the printing press being neither a 'State' not any 'other authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Besides the scales and pay which the petitioners are claiming in the present petition are the pay scales being paid to the defense Civilians, from the defense Services Estimates. Since the said Press employees are not government employees the said press employees cannot claim benefit of the same pay scales as that of the defense civilian employees.

7. Counsel for the petitioner, during the course of his arguments sought to rely upon the contents of letter dated 11.7.1989 which is placed on record on behalf of the petitioners. The same is a notice to one of the persons named in Annexure P-2 requesting him to appear for a practical test. The same is a notice issued prior to his appointment by the notice issued prior to his appointment by the Officer in charge, Naval Printing Press on behalf of the Chief of Naval Staff. In my considered opinion, the description therein that the Officer in charge, Naval Printing Press has issued the letter for Chief of the Naval Staff would not change the nature and character of the subsequent appointment of the said petitioner not the same could change the status of the NPP. So far the relief for regularisation is concerned, it is stated on behalf of the respondent that the employees of the Press on whose behalf the present petition has been preferred are all regular employees of the Press. This was clearly asserted before me by the counsel during the course of his arguments.

8. In view of the aforesaid stand and statement of the respondents no further order is required to be passed as claimed in the writ petition for regularisation since they stand regularised in their services in terms of the statements made on behalf of the respondents. However, so far the other relief claimed in the petition is concerned, no such relief could be granted by this Court as the writ petition is not maintainable and also on the ground that the employees of the Press cannot claim as a matter of right the same pay and allowance as being paid to the defense civilian employees as the petitioners are not similarly situated persons doing similar nature of jobs with that of defense civilian employees. The said relief for equal pay for equal work stands rejected on the aforesaid grounds. The petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order but without any costs.