Ahmadi, J. - (1.) The Director of Civil Defence, West Bengal, by Order No. 4729-HCD dated 24th July, 1965 appointed the petitioner on a temporary basis on the post of Staff Officer-cum-Instructor in the Directorate of Civil Defence, West Bengal in the scale of Rs. 175-325 plus usual allowances. The petitioner claims to be a member of the Civil Defence Corps. On this premise he contends that his case is governed by the Civil Defence Act, 1968 (Act No. 27 of 1968), hereinafter called 'the Act'. The said Act was brought into force with effect from 10th July, 1968. It may be advantageous to notice the relevant provisions of the said Act at this stage.
(2.) The Act was enacted to make provision for civil defence and for matters connected therewith. It extends to the whole of India. The expression 'Civil Defence Corps' has been defined to mean the corps formed wholly or mainly to meet the needs of civil defence, including an organisation deemed to be a corps under Section 4(1). That sub-section provides for the constitution of a Civil Defence Corps. It reads as under: "4(1) The State Government may constitute, for any area within the State, a body of persons to be called the Civil Defence Corps (hereinafter referred to as the "Corps") and may appoint a person. not being, in its opinion, below the rank of a District Magistrate (to be known as the "Controller") to command such Corps: Provided that if there is in existence in any area in a State, immediately before the commencement of this Act in that area, an organisation which, in the opinion of the State Government, may be entrusted with the functions of the Corps, the State Government may, instead of constituting a separate Corps for such area call upon that organisation to take over or discharge the functions of the Corps in that area, and thereupon such organisation shall be deemed, for the purposes of this Act, to be the Corps for the area. (2) The State Government may, for the purpose of co-ordinating the activities of the Controllers within the State, appoint a Director of Civil Defence and every Controller shall comply with the directions given by such Director." Section 5 empowers the State Government to appoint members and officers of the Corps. Sub-section (2) of Section 5 provides that every person appointed to be a member of the Corps shall be given a certificate of membership. Section 6 provides for the dismissal of a member of Civil Defence Corps while Section 7 provides for an appeal to the State Government against an order made under Section 6. Section 8 enumerates the functions of members of the Corps while Section 9 empowers the Central Government to make regulations. As the petitioner has sought directions in regard to the making of regulations we may reproduce the section for ready reference. It reads thus: "9(1) The Central Government may by notification make regulations for carrying out the purposes of this Chapter. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such regulations may - (a) prescribe the functions of the members of the Corps and regulate the manner in which they may be called out for service; (b) regulate the organisation, appointment, conditions of service, discipline, accoutrement and clothing of members of any or all of the Corps; (c) prescribe the form of certificates of membership of any or all of the Corps." Lastly Section 20 provides that every rule made under Section 3 and every regulation made under Section 9 by the Central Government shall be laid before each House of Parliament while in session for thirty days, Admittedly the Central Government has made rules in exercise of power conferred by Section 3 called the Civil Defence Rules, 1968. So also in exercise of power under Section 9 the Central Government made regulations called the Civil Defence Regulations, 1968. Regulation 4 lays down the manner of applying for appointment to the Corps and Regulation 7 prescribes the form of' certificate to be given on appointment. Regulation 8 sets out the conditions of service as under: "8. Conditions of Service.- (1) The members of the Corps shall ordinarily serve in a voluntary and honorary capacity: Provided that the State Government may, by order, authorise payment of duty allowance (at such scales as may be prescribed by it from time to time in consultation with the Central Government) to a member of the Corps when called on duty. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1), the Central Government may declare any appointment or class of appointments as paid appointments. A person appointed on the basis of payment shall be entitled to such conditions of service as regards pay, leave and other benefits as the State Government may, by order, prescribe." Regulation 13 provides for maintenance of service records whereas Regulation 14 provides for resignation from the Corps. These, in brief, are the relevant legal provisions. It will thus be seen that the rules and regulations can be made by the Central Government only.
(3.) We may now briefly state the petitioner's case (supra). The Civil Defence Organisation was set up in India in 1965 under the Defence of India Act and was later converted into a Civil Defence Corps under the Civil Defence Act, 1968. Accordingly the Civil Defence Organisation of West Bengal was converted into a Civil Defence Corps by Notification dated 10th July, 1968 and thereupon the petitioner became a member of the said Corps. He also claims to be the Secretary General of the Civil Defence Officers' Guild, India, a society registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. The petitioner points out that the Central Government in compliance with the Calcutta High Court's Order in Civil Rule No. 6221(W) of 1983 took over complete control of the Mobile Civil Emergency Force (MCEF) with effect from 1st April, 1992 under office order dated 26th February, 1992 whereby existing employees of MCEF, Calcutta became holders of civil posts under the Government of India and derived all the benefits admissible to such employees. Since the petitioner and others did not receive the same benefit as they were not covered under the said order there was hostile discrimination between two groups of the same organisation in total violation of the equality clause in Article 14 of the Constitution. According to the petitioner since the Civil Defence Act, 1968, is a Central Act and extends to the whole of India including West Bengal, it is incumbent on the Central Government to regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed in the Civil Defence Organisation all over the country by making appropriate provisions in the rules or regulations so that every employee is governed by a uniform set of service conditions. Since the State Governments are laying down service conditions de hors the rules and regulations under the Act there is total lack of uniformity which has resulted in the petitioner being discriminated in matters of pay, promotion, transfer, etc. Being aware that it has no power to frame regulations, the State of West Bengal resorted to obtaining undertakings from employees who desired to avail of the benefit of its regulations and those who were not prepared to furnish such undertakings were denied the benefits which introduced two sets of service conditions for employees working in the same organisation. It is said that members of the Guild like the petitioner are being victimised for their refusal to sign the undertaking. Thus the situation is that employees governed by State regulations on the strength of undertakings stand on a different footing from those who have refused to give such undertakings and both these classes taken together stand on a different footing from MCEF employees within the organisation governed by Central Government regulations. This, contends the petitioner, is clearly violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner, therefore, seeks in the main the following two reliefs: "(A) Issue an appropriate writ upon the respondent No. 1 to frame service rules governing service condition of members of Civil Defence Corps under the Civil Defence Act and take over administrative, financial and operational control of Civil Defence from State Government. (B) Issue of an appropriate writ prohibiting the respondents from subjecting the petitioner and members of the Guild to any rules and regulations outside the provisions of Section 9(2)(b) of Civil Defence Act." ;