Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. - (1.) Petitioners were the members of West Bengal National Volunteer Force commonly known as home guard. In or about 1985-86 the Food Corporation of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'FCI') wrote to the Superintendent of Police, 24 Parganas (North) to arrange for security of the FCI godown, Kelvin Depot. Accordingly, the concerned Superintendent of Police arranged for guarding the said godown by deploying home guards on rotational basis. The petitioners from time to time were deployed by concerned Superintendent of Police at the said godown. In turn the FCI paid requisite security charges to the Superintendent of Police, 24-Parganas (North) as demanded by him. This arrangement continued till February, 1998 as the FCI wanted to have their own security arrangement done through their in house employees.
(2.) The petitioners claimed for absorption as regular employee of the FCI. On perusal of the rival contentions of the parties made in various pleadings the following facts appeared to be undisputed:- (i) The petitioner were the home guards under the control of the West Bengal Police Force. They were time to time paid honorarium by the concerned police force. FCI did not have any relation at all with the petitioners. (ii) The volunteers were engaged on rotational basis and as such it could not be said that the petitioner worked at the said godown on regular basis. In any event they were never paid by FCI. (iii) The bills were time to time raised by the police force on the basis of the certificates given by FCI regarding the attendance of the concerned home guards. On the basis of such certificate bills were prepared and raised by the police force. FCI in turn paid the police force. The home guards including the petitioners got their monthly honorarium from the police force. (iv) There had been some disputes with regard to payment at one point of time which had resulted in the writ proceedings. However, in terms of the court order the petitioners were paid. (v) The said godown are now being managed and guarded by the in house employees of the FCI.
(3.) From the above undisputed facts it is clear to me that the petitioners did not have any relation with FCI. They were neither engaged by FCI at any point of time nor paid by them except in terms of the order of the court during the pendency of the writ proceedings. In such view of the matter the prayer for absorption does not fall within the formula prescribed by the Apex Court for absorption of temporary workers.;