- (1.) The review petition no. 35 of 2004 has been allowed today by this Court by a separate order passed in the said review petition. It has been held in the order passed today i.e., on 23rd April, 2012 that the question referred by the learned Single Judge was required to be answered by the Division Bench has not been answered and in view of the detailed reasons given in the above order dated 23rd April, 2012, it is clear that the issue requires consideration in the light of the fact that impugned Clauses in Rules were incorporated in view of earlier Award and thereafter because of settlement between the employees Union and Management under the Act of 1947 there were Awards which bind the employer and employees and the petitioners' contention is that the conditions in the Rules of 1994 are ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution and runs just contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Yogender Pal Singh and others Vrs. Union of India and others, 1987 AIR(SC) 1015 and in the case of Auditor General of India and others Vrs. G. Ananta Rajeswara Rao, 1994 AIR(SC) 1521 as well as cannot be justified in view of the decision given in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vrs. State of Haryana and others, 1994 4 SCC 138 and in the case of Director of Education (Secondary) and another Vrs. Pushpendra Kumar and others etc., 1998 AIR(SC) 2230.
(2.) Since there are Awards and the Rules benefiting the in service employees, therefore, the Union namely I.C.C. Workers' Union (A.I.T.U.C.), Moubhandar is impleaded as party-respondent and though it is very old matter, we deem it proper to issue notice to the workmen through their Union namely I.C.C. Workers' Union (A.I.T.U.C.), Moubhandar.
(3.) The notice be filed within three days by the petitioners and upon filing, notice be given to the learned counsel for the Corporation and the Corporation shall serve it upon the Union. Put-up this matter on 07th of May, 2012 for final disposal.;