K.Kannan, J. - (1.) ALL these writ petitions address the same issue of the tenability of a circular on the basis of which overtime allowances sought by the persons working in the office at Food Corporation of India were denied although the benefit was extended to other persons working at godowns, field offices etc. of the Food Corporation. It is an admitted case that all the petitioners working at the district office at the Food Corporation of India were also being paid overtime allowances upto the year 1982 and it had been resumed in the year 1987 after a hiatus during the years 1982 to 1987. This allowance was withdrawn on the ground that the persons working in the office were not covered by the provisions of the Punjab Shops and Commercial Establishment Act of 1958. It is a matter of fact that similar treatment meted out to the office staff at Delhi also was resisted by the office staff with a similar grievance and there had been independent proceedings at their instance also.
(2.) THE petitioners sought for computation of wages disallowed to them through an application under Section 33 -C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Industrial Tribunal at Chandigarh. It is again a matter of record that the staff at the office at Delhi had also filed similar applications before the Tribunal at Delhi. THE Tribunal at Delhi had allowed the applications declaring the petitioners before it as entitled to overtime allowances. THE Tribunal at Chandigarh dismissed it. It appears that the Management of Food Corporation of India had challenged the decision of the Industrial Tribunal before the High Court at Delhi in CWP No.2469 of 1986. It appears that the Food Corporation subsequently withdrew from the writ petition and allowed the benefit of overtime allowances during the disputed period to the staff at the office of Food Corporation. When the fact of parallel proceedings before the Industrial Tribunal at Delhi was brought to the attention of this Court, this Court (Justice TPS Mann) had directed the Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, to be present before the Court. He had come present before the Court as per the directions and stated that they still wanted to persist in the contention on its own merit and he was not himself personally aware of how and under what circumstances, the writ petition filed in CWP No.1892 of 1988 was allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn. I had directed the counsel to argue the case on merits.
(3.) THE petitioners had two issues to contend with, (i) the applicability of a claim under Section 33 -C(2) even when there was no established right and the entitlement of the petitioners to seek for the overtime allowances when there was no particular award granting to them their right and (ii) the applicability of the provisions of Punjab Shops and Commercial Establishment Act to the persons working at the district office of the Corporation to claim overtime allowances at par with the staff working in the field areas or the godowns.;