Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. - (1.) Doubting correctness of the view of this Court in Union of India vs. Mohd. Aslam (2001) 1 SCC 720) reference has been made to a three-Judge Bench and that is how these appeals are before this Bench. The controversy lies within a very narrow compass.
(2.) The issue is as to the status of an employee of Unit Run Canteen in Armed Forces. While admitting Civil Appeal No. 3495/2005 the matter was referred to a larger Bench as noted above and other cases were tagged with Civil Appeal No. 3495 of 2005. We shall deal with the factual scenario in Civil Appeal No. 3495 of 2005 and after deciding the legal issues involved, apply the decision to the other appeals.
(3.) Appellant Shri R.R. Pillai was recruited as Airman in the Indian Air force on 7.10.1967 and was discharged from service on 31.10.1988 as Junior Warrant Officer as he sought for, premature retirement from service. Before his discharge he had been looking after the affairs of the Unit-Run-Canteen (in short the 'URC'). After discharge he was engaged as Manager of URC at Southern Air Command on an honorarium of Rs. 1,000/- P.M. w.e.f 1.2.1989. Para 6 of the appointment letter clearly stated that the appointment was governed by the terms and conditions as laid down in Air HQ letter No.20728/P/Org dated 31st January, 1984 issued under the relevant Regulations. The terms and conditions of service of canteen employees are covered by the rules called "The Rules regulating the Terms and Conditions of Service of Civilian Employees of Air Force Unit Run Canteen paid out of Non Public Funds".;