PROKASH CHANDRA MALLICK, J. - (1.) In these three original applications, the applicants have prayed for a direction to the respondents : (i) to extend to them the benefits of temporary employees under the Railways such as facilities of leave, pass, quarters and weekly rest day, which are extended to other temporary employees of the railways with effect from 25.3.86, 3.10.86 and 7.7.86 respectively. (ii) to extend the pay scale at par with other temporary employees of Group D of the Railways to the applicants with effect from 25.3.86, 3.10.86 and 7.7.86 respectively; and (iii) to prepare a scheme of regularising the services of the applicants in the light of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Bharatiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v/s. Union of India & Ors. ( : AIR 1987 SC 2342). Besides, in O.A. 139 of 88, the applicants have also prayed for the quashing of the impugned order dated 30.10.87 (Annexure -F to that application).
(2.) Since the applicants in these three applications are similarly circumstanced, they have prayed for the same reliefs and have been represented by the same counsel, these cases were heard together and a common judgement is being recorded.
(3.) The facts of these cases may be briefly stated. There are 25 applicants in O.A. 139 of '88, who were employed as Volunteers on daily wage Rs. 8/ - per day in Asansol Division of the Eastern Railway in November, 1984 to assist the regular Ticket Checking staff for the purpose of preventing ticketless travel and also to boost the revenue and income of railways. They went on performing their duties without break. Their case is that though they were engaged as volunteers, in effect, they were casual labourers of the railways and on completion of 365 days of work, without break, they had acquired temporary status. However, the benefits and statutory rights of the applicants as temporary employees were denied them by the authorities of the Eastern Railway and they were treated as volunteers. On 8.1.86, they came to know that a purported order dated 12.85 had been issued by the D.R.M., Asansol directing the Station Superintendent, Durgapur, to dis -engage the applicants on the midnight 30 -31.1.1986. They challenged the order dated 16.12.85 O.A. 10 1986 before this Bench. The application was admitted on 24.1.86 and order of status quo was passed on that date. The Tribunal delivered its judgement in O.A. 10 of 1986 on 25.3.86 quashing the impugned order dated 16.12.85 and directing the applicants to be treated as temporary employees. It further observed that once the applicants are treated as temporary employees, their service conditions would be governed by the relevant rules of the railways. A copy of the judgement is at Annexure -B to the said application. This judgement has been reported as Samir Kr. Mukherjee v/s. G.M., Eastern Railway & Ors. (ATR 1986(2) CAT 7).;