Judgment:
(1.) The petitioners herein twenty four in numbers, working as casual employees of the Nagaland Pulp and Paper Co. Ltd., (in short NPPC), Paper Nagar Tuli in the district of Mokokchung, Nagaland, have approached this Court under prerogative and discretionary writ jurisdiction seeking a direction to the official respondents to pay regular scale of pay and to regularize the services of the petitioners with other benefits.
(2.) Heard Mr. A Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. TB Jamir, learned Central Govt. Counsel appearing for respondent No.1, Mr. LS Jamir, learned Additional Advocate General, Nagaland, appearing for respondent No.2, Mr. J Roy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 and Mr. CT Jamir, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 6.
(3.) In a nutshell the court is called upon to set at rest the question of regular pay scale as well as regularization of services with other benefits to the petitioners, as sought for, would be available or not in view of the facts pleaded and established by the contesting parties under writ jurisdiction whereof facts of the case is summarized hereinbelow- The petitioners were appointed to the post of skilled/semi skilled and unskilled worker between April 1984 and November 1985 except the petitioner No. 17 who was appointed in November 1987 against sanctioned post by the NPPC on casual basis and were paid daily wages at the rate of Rs.18/-, Rs.16/- and Rs.10/- respectively which, however, increased subsequently, whereof a glance of the appointment letters issued by the Manager, Personnel and Administration to the petitioner No. 1 on 14.05.1984 would be relevant which is quoted hereunder:
"NAGALAND PULP and PAPER COMPANY LIMITED, P.O: PAPERNAGAR: DIST: MOKUKCHUNG: NAGALAND R/RT/C-A/83..Date:14.05.84 TO MK DEY, C/o, MN DEY Welder Gr.I. Sub:-.APPOINTMENT AS CASUAL EMPLOYEE . ."You are appointed to the post of Mazdoor Casual basis at the rate of Rs. 10/- per attendance day (consolidated) for a period of 90 days with effect from the date of joining for duty. .The company reserve the right to terminate you at any time before the expiry of the above period without giving any notice and assigning any reason thereof. .On the basis of this appointment you will have no claim for permanent absorption or continuance in service beyond the period stipulated above. You will not be entitled to any privileges admissible to the regular employees of this company. .You are requested to report to the General Manager (Works) of the company. DISTRIBUTION: 1. G.M(Works)/Manager (PandA) 2. Asstt. Manager (Personnel) 3.Asstt. Manager (Finance)
(4.) Time Office. "MANAGER PERSONNEL and ADMINISTRATION" .It may be pertinent to mention that similar appointment letters with the same stipulation were issued to all the petitioners save and except the rate of daily wages varied between the skilled, semi skilled and unskilled employees. To determine as to whether the relief as sought for would be available under writ jurisdiction when NPPC in order to revive and ran the mill issued a circular identifying the category of employees who may be required to go on voluntary retirement, the details of which would be referred in appropriate paragraphs. 4. However, the period of services of the petitioners were extended from time to time and subsequently thereof interview was held determining the scale of pay for different categories of posts but no regular appointments were made though some of the similarly situated employees were regularized with scale of pay depriving the petitioners from regular scale of pay violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India and therefore sought the relief as indicated above.
(5.) The respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to 6 filed their respective affidavit-in- opposition disputing the pleadings of the writ petitioners and subsequently due to change of events have filed additional affidavits to which a rejoinder has been filed by the petitioners. As the averments made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed by both the official respondents are same, it would be appropriate to refer one of the affidavits filed by the official respondents to avoid the burden of the judgment. The averments made by the official respondents in a nutshell is summarized hereinbelow-
a) The NPPC is a joint venture of Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited (in short, HPCL), a Government of India Enterprise and the Government of Nagaland. The NPPC was incorporated in September 1971 and has a unit at Tuli in the district Mokokchung, Nagaland for manufacture of writing, printing and kraft paper with an installed capacity of 33,000 tpa. The original cost of the scheme estimated at Rs. 1975 lakhs in 1972, escalated to Rs. 8373 lakhs in 1981, after a series of cost overruns. This was financed by equity capital of Rs. 4663 lakhs (HPCL: Rs. 4082 lakhs and Government of Nagaland Rs. 383 lakhs) and term loan of Rs. 3708 lakhs by Government of India, canalized through HPCL. The unit commenced its commercial production in the year 1982- .b) The NPPC's performance from the commencement of the unit had been dismal resulting in losses on continuous basis and as a consequence whereof the unit has been lying closed since September 1992 and in the meantime the accumulated loss of the unit came to Rs. 22810 lakhs, yielding a negative networth of Rs. 17948 lakhs; c) Situated with such loss the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs directed an expert study to be conducted by the Bureau of Industrial Costs and Prices (in short BICP) to ascertain the viability of NPPC. The study was undertaken by BICP with the help of a consultant. Further a techno- economic feasibility report was also prepared by HPCL based on a report submitted by consultant; d) NPPC incurred heavy loss from its inception on account of- i) location factor, ii) additional cost for site development, iii) extra foundation, iv) construction of approach roads and bridges, v) extra cost on freight, transportation, handling and erection of equipment, vi) extra cost for facilities like water, sewage, drainage and vii) provision for infrastructure and due to other factors for which the project cost of NPPC escalated to Rs. 8373 lakhs and hence the liabilities call for drastic restructuring; e) In the meantime Sick Industries Companies Act was amended in 1991, so NPPC came under the purview of Board of Industrial Financial Restructuring (in short BIFR) and a reference was made to BIFR. The BIFR appointed Industrial Development Bank of India (in short, IDBI) the Operation Agency for preparing a rehabilitation scheme, wherefor a report was prepared. In the hearing of the BIFR held on 13.11.1995 after threadbare deliberations the Bench observed as thus: ."After considering the facts of the case and referring to the submission made, the Bench concluded that the NW of the company at Rs.120 crores being the excess of its AL Rs. 103 crores as on the date of the last available balance sheet, the company had ceased to be an SIC in terms of Section 3(1)(c) of the Act and accordingly, it stood discharged, as a sick industrial company from the purview of the BIFR. The Bench added that the company would, however, continue to be under purview of BIFR under Section 23 of the Act and it will have to in compliance of the said Section, regularly submit the prescribed statements in regard to its operations to BIFR". f) Thereafter to curtail the liability of the company, the company introduced Voluntary Retirement Scheme (in short VRS), to reduce excess manpower, whereby 324 employees had gone under VRS so far, i.e., as on 31.10.1997 and the said scheme is still in vogue.
(6.) The affidavit-in-opposition has further averred that the petitioners were appointed as casual workers and there was no continuity of service as it would reveal from the appointment letters and therefore cannot claim regularization of service. It has been categorically denied that the petitioners were appointed against sanctioned post. However it is admitted that few casual workers have been given regular scale of pay and except one, the rests are local residents of the area, inasmuch as, as per reservation policy applicable in the State of Nagaland, all non- technical posts of class III and IV are reserved for the five tribes, i.e., (1) Any Naga Tribe, (2) Kuki, (3) Kachari, (4) Garo and (5) Mikir, provided they are indigenous inhabitants of the State of Nagaland. Moreover, the appointing authority, considering all relevant factors and need of the company, decided not to