Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) All these three applications under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India were heard analogously as those are preferred against the common judgment dated June 22, 2001 passed by the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal in T.A. No. 391 of 1998, T.A. No. 392 of 1998, O.A. No. 2377 of 1999 and O.A. No. 4636 of 1999, all heard analogously before the Tribunal. The T.A. No. 391 of 1998 originates from W.P. No. 1643 of 1996 filed in this High Court by the Registered Association of the Copywriters and was transferred to the Tribunal along with another writ application being W.P. No. 2304 of 1996 and the same was renumbered as T.A. No. 392 of 1998 and the other two were filed by the individual copywriters claiming identical relief direct before the Tribunal.
(2.) The common case made out by the applicants in all the four matters before the Tribunal may be summed up thus: (a) The members of the West Bengal Registration Copywriters' Association as well as the applicants in the other matters were the licensees under the West Bengal Registration (Copywrites) Rules, 1982 [which have since been replaced by the West Bengal Registration (Copywriters) Rules, 1999 during the pendency of the proceedings before the Tribunal] in order to prepare the prescribed true copies of the documents to be presented the prescribed true copies of the documents to be presented for registration under the West Bengal Registration (Filing of True Copies) Rules, 1979 on receipt of fees prescribed under the aforesaid Rules. They filed the applications for their absorption/regularization as regular employees in the cadre of Lower Division Clerk under the authority concerned and for prohibiting the State authority from appointing any one without appointing the applications and their members first in the said cadre. (b) According to the applicants, for quite sometime past, they had been regularly giving representations to the respondents for their permanent absorption as copywriters under the respondents. They claimed that due to lack of sufficient work, the copywriters had been suffering from insecurity having no chance of promotion or stability in the working field. In the year 1995, the applicants staged demonstration and even went on strike throughout the State of West Bengal and ultimately, at the intervention and assurance of the Finance Minister of the State of West Bengal that their grievances will be considered, such agitation was withdrawn. (c) Even, thereafter nothing had been done though the Association filed several representations for consideration of the applicants' demand and grievances. (d) Recently, various vacancies had cropped up in the office of the Registrars throughout the State of West Bengal under the respondent No. 2, the Inspector General of Registration, and accordingly, the Registrars of the various districts including the Registrar of Assurance, Calcutta had asked the Employment Exchange to sponsor the names of the eligible candidates for the purpose of appointment in the post of the Lower Division Clerk, Previously, in the year 1978, the respondents had absorbed all the then copywriters working in the office of the Registrars throughout the State of West Bengal as Lower Division Clerk under the said office and had employed them under the Registration Department. At that point of time, the copywriters were known as extra-muharrirs. This was done to provide those muharrirs with permanent job and in fact, even the bar of age under the Government service was relaxed on the ground that as the extra-muharrirs were working as copywriters, the bar of age should not be applicable. (e) Similarly, the members of the applicants were working from the year 1984 and had otherwise the requisite qualifications, expertise and experience to work as Lower Division Clerk in the office of the said Registrar. (f) Very recently, some vacancies, as already stated above, having been cropped up in the office of the Registrars throughout the West Bengal, the respondents were trying to recruit new entrants as Lower Division Clerk though the members of the writ petitioners had the requisite qualification and they were not even given the liberty to appear at the examination. (g) The members of the applicants were given licence on the basis of Registration Card of Employment Exchange and they had not renewed the identity card in view of their engagement as copywriters, as a result, they could not be sponsored even by the Employment Exchange. The members of the applicants were given licence of copywriters on the basis of tests and selections as the holders of the Employment Exchange cards and were given assurance that they would be ultimately absorbed in the office of the respective Registrars when such vacancies would appear in future. (h) The members of the applicants had been carrying on the jobs of the licensed of copywriters at the office of the Registrar from the year 1984 and some of the petitioners had crossed the age limit of 35 years for absorption into the Government service i.e. at the induction level. (i) The job of the members of the applicants are governed by the statutory rules and they were regularly discharging their duties honestly, diligently, sincerely and continuously, without any break and blemish as copywriters which was previously done by the extra-muharrirs and consequently, they were required to be absorbed by the State Government instead of creating a new cadre in place of extra-muharrirs. The Government had decided to fill up such vacancies without engaging the copywriters by planning to grant licence to them under the said statutory rules. However, the licensed copywriters had not been given the status of the Government servants. (j) Although the copywriters under the statutory rules are required to work under the full control of the Government, they are not recognized as the Government employees and as such, there should be specific direction for the absorption of the members of the petitioners in the regular Government post. (k) The conduct of the respondents violated Articles 14, 16, 21 and 41 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) The previously mentioned applications were resisted by the State of West Bengal thereby denying the material allegations contained therein. They disputed the relationship of the employer and the employees between the parties and their specific defence was that the members of the applicants were nothing but the licensees under the West Bengal Registration (Copywriters) Rules, 1982 (at present under the rules of 1999) and they had to perform their duties as copywriters under the terms and conditions contained in the licence as well as the Rules. It was denied that the members of the applicants had been working under the Government authority or that the Government ever assured them for their absorption and regularization in the cadre of Lower Division Clerk under the authority concerned. The State Government, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the applications.;