O.Chennappa Reddy, J. - (1.) The Hirakud Workmen Association claiming to represent about 1200 workmen working in the work-charged establishment of the Hirakud Project since before 1.4.1960 is the appellant in Civil Appeal No.348 of 1974. The project was initially entrusted to the Central Waterways, Irrigation and Navigation Commission and the workmen were drawing the scales of pay etc. permissible to employees in the work-charged establishments of the Central Public Works Department. With effect from 1.4.1960, the State Government took over the project and it was understood that the work-charged staff recruited prior to 1.4.1960 should be allowed to continue on the same scales of pay and conditions of service as were applicable to them on 31.3.1960 and that retrenchment, should take place only when their services were not required by the said Project. This is evident from the order of the Government of Orissa No. H.K.C.-6A-23-61/2438 dated 8th September, 1961. In regard to persons who took up employment subsequent to 1.4.1960, they were paid pay scales applicable to employees of work-charged establishments of the Orissa Government OCR and not the scales of pay of the Central Government. In order to remove this disparity between OCR those who were employees OCR in the establishments prior to 1.4.1960 and those who came to be employed in the projects subsequent to 1.4.1960, the. Government of Orissa conceived the idea of terminating the services of those employees who were working in the work-charged establishments prior to 1.4.1960 and offering them service in the new scales of pay applicable to the employees of the Government of Orissa. The workmen naturally raised an industrial dispute and after, they had OCR made journeys upto the High Court and Supreme Court and back to the Industrial Tribunal, it has OCR now being held by the Tribunal that the Orissa Government had the right to terminate the services of the workmen. The notice of termination given to the workmen has been placed before us and on a OCR perusal of the same, we cannot possibly hold that it is not a case of retrenchment as conceived OCR by a series of cases of this Court ending with 1984(1). Labour Law Journal, P.110. We are unable to agree with the conclusion of the Tribunal that the termination of the services of these employees was not retrenchment. It is not disputed that if it is retrenchment, the termination was not proper in which event the workmen would be entitled to the previous scales of pay. We therefore allow this appeal and declare that the workmen working in the work-charged establishments of the Hirakud Project from before 1.4.1960 are entitled to the same scales of pay and other conditions of service as before as if they were employees of the work-charged establishments of the Central Public Works Department.
(2.) There will be a similar order in Civil Appeal No. 349 of 1974.
(3.) In Civil Appeal No. 349/74 a further question was raised whether on the completion of three years of service the employees do not become eligible for confirmation. We do not express any opinion on this question as the material before us is not sufficient for coming to a conclusion either way. We however. notice that it was stated before the Tribunal that the matter was under active consideration of the Government. We do hope that the State Government has favourably considered the matter.;