S VENKATESH vs ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA on 30 October 2026

O R D E R

Per: Hon’ble Shri Santosh Mehra ……Member(A) Through this OA, the applicant has sought the following reliefs: “(a) Call for records of the case from the respondents and on perusal (b) quash and set aside the office order bearing No. OA/117/2016- Adm-999 dated 4.7.2023 (Annexure A7) passed by respondent No.3 in so far as it relates to grant of temporary status from the date of issue of said office order and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to implement the order dated 12.9.2022 in OA No.117/2016 in its true spirit by granting arrears of pay and allowances to the applicant from 12.3.2011 when the other employees were grant such benefits till 9.7.2023.

(c) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit to grant to the applicant in the circumstances of the case including an order as to exemplary costs for unnecessarily subjecting a low paid employee to unnecessary and avoidable litigation in the interests of justice.”

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows: The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been working as a casual labourer in the Archaeological Survey of India since 1988. When his colleagues were granted Temporary Status and he was denied the same, he approached this Hon’ble Tribunal in OA No. 117/2016 which was allowed. Against the order of this Tribunal, the respondents filed a Writ Petition in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka who remanded the matter back to the Tribunal. The Hon’ble Tribunal again allowed the OA by its Order dated 12.09.2022 directing the respondents to grant Temporary Status and all consequential benefits to the applicant. When the applicant preferred Contempt Petition No. 7/2023, as the respondents failed to comply with the Orders, midway the Respondents passed an Order vide No. OA/117/2016-Adm-999, dated 04.07.2023 granting Temporary Status to the applicant, but only with effect from 12.09.2022. Despite repeated representations by the applicant to the respondents to provide him all consequential arrears of pay and allowances with effect from 2011 as ordered by this Tribunal, the respondents did not agree to the same. Hence, the applicant has approached this Hon’ble Tribunal for relief.

3. Applicant

(i) The Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the applicant has been working as a casual labourer in Archaeological Survey of India, since 1988. Despite completion of 28 years of service, when he was not given Temporary Status, he approached this Hon’ble Tribunal in OA No. 117/2016. This Hon’ble KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

Tribunal vide its order dated 29.11.2018, allowed the OA and directed the respondents to extend Temporary Status to him. When the order of the Tribunal was challenged by the respondents in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No. 30249/2019, the High Court disposed of the matter vide its Order dated 19.01.2021 by remanding the matter back to this Hon’ble Tribunal with certain directions. This Hon’ble Tribunal again allowed the OA and directed the respondents to grant Temporary Status to the applicant and also consider granting him all consequential benefits as per the Scheme.

(ii) The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that when the respondents failed to comply with the orders of this Tribunal, the applicant instituted C.P. No. 7/2023 and while the proceedings were going, the respondents passed an Order dated 04.07.2023 granting the applicant Temporary Status and accordingly the Hon’ble Tribunal closed the contempt petition.

(iii) The learned counsel for the applicant points out that in pursuance of the Order dated 04.07.2023, the applicant joined duty as a Temporary Status Casual Labour (TSCL) employee on 10.07.2023. However, as he was not granted all the consequential benefits by the respondents, the applicant submitted a representation dated 14.08.2023 followed by reminders on 05.01.2024 and 25.03.2024, requesting the respondents for payment of arrears of salary and allowances from 12.03.2011.

(iv) Inviting my attention to Annexure A-6, the learned counsel for the applicant further points out that the similarly situated employees were granted Temporary Status from 2011 itself and their basic pay and allowances is much higher than what he has been getting. He avers that those who were regularised KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

in time were getting Rs. 25,600 as basic pay compared to the applicant who was getting only Rs. 18,000 as basic pay.

(v) The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in view of his repeated representations to the respondents for full implementation of the Order of this Tribunal in OA No. 117/2016, they transferred the applicant out from Hampi Circle to Koppal Sub Circle vide order dated 14.08.2024 as a vengeful act. However, his Transfer Order has been stayed by this Hon’ble Tribunal vide its order dated 12.09.2024 in OA No. 467/2024.

(vi) The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the 4th respondent has misunderstood the Orders of the Hon’ble Tribunal while addressing a letter dated 16.08.2023 to the 2nd respondent to grant Temporary Status to the applicant in the light of the Orders of this Hon’ble Tribunal dated 12.09.2022. He clarifies that though the Order of the Tribunal was passed on 12.09.2022, it does not mean that the applicant has to be granted Temporary Status from that day. In this regard, he places reliance on Annexure A-10, secured by him under RTI which states that all the employees who were similarly situated were granted Temporary Status from 2011 and the same benefits should be extended to the applicant also.

(vii) The learned counsel for the applicant sums up by stating that as all similarly situated employees were granted Temporary Status from 12.03.2011, the applicant should also be extended similar benefits which was the intent of the Order of this Hon’ble Tribunal dated 12.09.2022.

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

4. Reply The Learned Counsel for the Respondents has filed the reply.

(i) The learned counsel for the respondents has stated that the applicant was not a permanent employee of ASI and he was initially engaged on muster on need basis as a casual worker. She further states that in compliance of the Order of this Tribunal in OA No. 117/2016 dated 12.09.2022, the respondents had implemented the same vide F. No. C-18015/107/2018-Adm-II dated 16.02.2023.

(ii) Refuting the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that a cost of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the respondents, the learned counsel for the respondents points that the impugned order of this Tribunal dated 29.11.2018 passed in OA No. 170/00117/2016 and the Order passed subsequently on 25.06.2019 in review application No. 170/00007/2019 were quashed and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal.

(iii) The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the applicant was entitled to TSCL scale wages and the same has already been granted to him. The applicant had also accepted the same and had joined for duty on 10.07.2023 vide his joining report dated 10.07.2023. (Annexure R-4).

(iv) The learned counsel for the respondents argues that the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that arrears of salary should be paid from 12.03.2011 is totally irrelevant as the Hon’ble Tribunal in its Order dated 12.09.2022 in OA No. 117/2016 had directed that the applicant is covered under the scheme for Grant of Temporary Status and Regulation Scheme of 1993 and the same has already been granted to him. KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

(v) Refuting the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been transferred from Kamalapura Sub Circle to Koppal Sub Circle was revengeful, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that Kamalapur Sub Circle and Koppal Sub Circle are within the ASI, Hampi Circle and are just 35 km from each other.

5. Rejoinder In response to the reply filed by the learned counsel for the respondents, the learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has essentially reiterated the facts which are already mentioned in the OA. However, the important points mentioned in the rejoinder are summarized as below:

(i) The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant became entitled for grant of TSCL, when those who joined with him and his juniors were granted the same. He points out that the applicant had worked for more than 240 days in 1988 itself but was finally granted the TSCL only after a prolonged process of judicial proceedings which finally culminated in his filing a Contempt Petition. He argues that the Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 30249/2019 dated 19.01.2021 remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to thoroughly examine the records and determine whether the applicant had worked for more than 240 days or not. After proper examination of the records, this Hon’ble Tribunal allowed the OA and directed the respondents to grant him temporary status, which was finally implemented only after he filed a Contempt Petition.

(ii) The learned counsel for the applicant further points out that Annexure R- 4 is essentially the copy of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal dated 12.09.2022 and Annexure R-5 is only the last page of the same order. KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

(iii) The learned counsel for the applicant highlights the point that the learned counsel for the respondents has not at all addressed the issue of his juniors getting more pay from 2011 than the applicant and non-payment of arrears to him.

(iv) The learned counsel for the applicant concludes by placing reliance on RTI reply received by him on 07.10.2024 marked as Annexure RJ-1 which indicates several persons who were granted TSCL from 2011 itself as against the applicant who was granted the same with effect from 12.09.2022

6. Analysis and Conclusion:

(1) I have heard at length the arguments of both the counsels and have also gone through all the documents and records which were brought on record by the respective counsels.

(2) At this stage, it would be useful to go through the relevant documents/records which have been submitted by the rival counsel for better appreciation of the entire issue and for arriving at correct conclusion. They are reproduced as follows:

(i) Pay drawn statement of applicant vis-à-vis his colleagues (ANNEXURE A-

“DETAILS OF PAY AND ALLOWANCES FOR THE MONTH SEPTEMBER 2023 IN RESPECT OF TSCL STAFF, HAMPI CIRCLE

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

Sl.N o. Name (s/s)

B. Pay TA O. Pa y DA Pay HRA Pay TA T A Gross Lic enc e Re cov er of P. Ta x GPF Sub. Tot al Ded ucti on Net Sala ry Le ve l TSCL HAMPI CIRCLE Arre ars Fee Lic ens e

pay

Fee

Abid a Hussai nsab Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

2,304

39,934

4,000 4,2

35,7

Han uma kka Sukka ppa Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

37,630

5,000 5,3

32,2

Cha ndra shek ar Nallas wamy Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

37,630

5,000 5,3

32,2

Nar asim ha Pras ad Subba raj Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

2,304

40,414

1,536 1,7

38,6

Shiv aku mar Muthu swam y Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

37,630

1,536 1,9

35,7

Bhe ema — Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

2,304

39,934

5,000 5,2

34,7

Shar ada — Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

2,304

39,934

5,000 5,2

34,7

Ram akka Hanu manth appa Hampi Circle 25,600

10,7

2,304

39,934

5,000 5,2

34,7

S. Ven kate sh — Hampi Circle 18,000

7,56

1,800

28,638

1,080 1,2

27,3

Annexure RJ-1: RTI Reply dated 07.10.2024:

“ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST HAMPI CIRCLE, HOSAPETE No. 1/7/RTI/2020-21 Date:07.10.2024

To, Shri S. Venkatesh, S/o Late Swaminathan, Hampi Power House-583215, Hosapete Tq, Vijayanagara Dist. Sub: Information Sought under RTI Act 2005 – Regarding KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

……………. S.NO Name Designation Date of Joining Place of Posting

5. Smt. K. Hanumakka TSCL 28.11.2011 Kamalapur Sub-Circle

7. Shri Shivakumar TSCL 23.06.2014 Kamalapur Sub-Circle

8. Shri K.Mohammad Ali TSCL 01.10.2012 Kamalapur Sub-Circle

9. Smt. Nagamma TSCL 01.12.2011 Kamalapur Sub-Circle

21. Shri Rajamani TSCL 01.12.2011 Hampi Sub- Circle

24. Shri Venugopala TSCL 30.01.2021 Hampi Sub- Circle -- -- -- -- --

A bare reading of Annexure RJ-1 indicates that all the names shown (32 in No.) joined Kamalapur and Hampi Sub Circles as TSCL between 2012 and 2023. If this Annexure is read in conjunction with Annexure A-6, it is observed that a very large number of them for example, Hanumakka at Serial No. 2 and Shivakumar at Serial No. 32 are having a Basic Pay of Rs. 25, 600 compared to the applicant who has been getting a basic pay of Rs 18,000.

(ii) Office order dated 04.07.2023 (ANNEXURE A-7)

“ No. OA/117/2016-Adm-999 Government of India Archaeological Survey of India Bangalore Circle

Kendriya Sadan, Koramangala, Bengaluru. Date: 04.07.2023. OFFICER ORDER Consequent upon approval communicated by the Director General, ASI, New Delhi vide Letter No. C-18015/107/2018-Admn.II, dated 16.06.2023 and direction of the Hon'ble CAT, Bengaluru Bench order KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

dated 12.09.2022, Shri. S Venkatesh S/o Shri. Swaminathan, Casual Labourer, is granted temporary status, subject to the following terms and conditions as per the guidelines contained in DOPT. OM dated 10.9.1993…………….”

Order dated 16.06.2023 (ANNEXURE A-9)

“F. No. C-18015/107/2018-Admn.II. Government of India Archaeological Survey of India Dharohar Bhawan, 24 Tilak Marg. New Delhi-110001 Dated 16.06.2023 To, Superintending Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of India, Bangalore Circle, Bangalore

Sub: Intimation about Caveat Petition filed by Shri S. Venkatesh- reg. Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter F.No. 117/2016-7665 dated 02.11.2022 on the above subject and to convey the approval of Competent Authority to grant Temporary Status to Shri S. Venkatesh in the aforesaid Court case as per direction of the CAT, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru Order dated 12.09.2022.

2. In this context, SA Bangalore is requested to issue formal order extending Temporаrу Status to Shri S.Venkatesh and to post him at Hampi Circle. ………….”

The above Orders are merely indicating that the applicant is granted Temporary Status in compliance with the directions of Hon’ble Tribunal Order dated 12.09.2022 as per the guidelines contained in DoPT OM dated 10.09.1993. However, it does not mention the date from which Temporary Status is granted to the applicant. Hence, it would be useful to have a look at the Order of the KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

Bangalore Bench of CAT dated 29.11.2018 and subsequent Order dated 12.09.2022 which form the basis of the grant of Temporary Status to the applicant. The relevant portions of these Orders are mentioned as follows:

(1) Extracts of the Judgement of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru in OA No. 170/00117/2016 dated 29.11.2018 (ANNEXURE A-8) “CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/117/2016 DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018 …………….. The issue is in a very small compass. Consequent to our order, the respondents and the applicant together verified the records and found that 1988 the applicant had worked for 243 1/2 days. Therefore, he will squarely covered within the scheme. Therefore eligible for temporary status accordance with the scheme.

2. OA allowed to this limited extent. Benefits to be granted within one month next. No order as to costs.”

(2) Extracts of the Judgement of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru in OA No. 170/00117/2016 dated 12.09.2022 (ANNEXURE R-5)

“CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/117/2016 DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 ……………..

11. A careful perusal of the scheme on the Casual Labourers for grant of Temporary Status and Regularization Scheme of Government of India, 1993 as notified by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions indicates the following provisions":- KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

1. This scheme shall be called "Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme of Government of India, 1993."

2. This Scheme will come into force w. e. f. 1.9.1993

3. This scheme is applicable to casual labourers in employment of the Ministries/Departments of Government of India and their attached and subordinate offices, on the date of issue of these orders. But it shall not be applicable to casual workers in Railways, Department of Telecommunication and Department of Posts who already have their own schemes.

4. Temporary Status

(i) Temporary status would be conferred on all casual labourers who are in employment on the date of issue of this OM and who have rendered a continuous service of at least one year, which means that they must have been engaged for a period of at least 240 days (206 days in the case of offices observing 5 days week).

……………..

12. A careful perusal of provisions under para 4 (i) of the scheme, indicates that under the scheme "Temporary status would be conferred on all casual labourers who are in employment on the date of issue of this OM and who have rendered a continuous service of at least one year, which means that they must have been engaged for a period of at least 240 days (206 days in the case of offices observing 5 days week)". It is nowhere stated under the scheme that the period of one year has to be the financial year.

13. As per the data made available by the respondents themselves, as a part of the record of the committee which had examined the Muster Rolls and given a detailed report, the total number of days worked by the applicant in the calendar year 1988 comes to 243 ½ days. This therefore exceeds the requirement of being engaged for at least 240 days in a year in the year 1988.

14. It is also not in dispute from the records that the applicant was in employment on the date of issue of this OM i.e. 01.09.1993. As per the pleadings made by the applicant which have not been refuted by the respondents, the applicant has been in employment as a casual labour since 1986 till date.

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

15. Keeping in view the facts noted above, the applicant is entitled to be covered under the scheme for Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation Scheme of 1993. He is also entitled to all other benefits given under the Scheme right from the date of grant of Temporary Status.

16. Accordingly, the OA is allowed and the respondents are directed to grant the status of Temporary Status to the applicant and also consider granting him all consequential benefits as entitled to him under the scheme under law. ……………….”

(3) The above Orders of the Bangalore Bench of Hon’ble CAT clearly bring out the following:

(i) The applicant is squarely covered within the Scheme and therefore is eligible for Temporary Status in accordance with the Scheme.

(ii) The applicant is entitled to be covered under the Scheme for Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation Scheme of 1993. He is also entitled to all other benefits given under the Scheme right from the date of grant of Temporary Status.

(4) Thus, it is clear that the applicant is entitled to Temporary Status and all other consequential benefits under the Scheme. However, the crux of the matter is the date from which the applicant is entitled to Temporary Status under the scheme. In this regard, Para 4 of this Scheme is reiterated as follows:

“4. Temporary Status

(i) Temporary status would be conferred on all casual labourers who are in employment on the date of issue of this OM and who have rendered a continuous service of at least one year, which means that they must have been KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

engaged for a period of at least 240 days (206 days in the case of offices observing 5 days week)….”

(5) It has been clearly established in the above two cited judgements of this Tribunal that the applicant had joined in 1988 and he was granted Temporary Status after the Tribunal came to a conclusion that he had indeed being working for at least 240 days in each year. The OM, regarding the Scheme designated as Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme of Government of India, 1993 became effective from 1 September 1993. The OM categorically states that all casual labourers who have worked for 240 days in a year are eligible for Temporary Status from the date of the issue of the OM. The OM was issued in 1993 and hence it is applicable to all casual labourers, who complete 240 days in a year from 1993 onwards. It has also been reiterated by the learned counsel for the applicant several times that many of the similarly situated employees were granted Temporary Status from 12.03.2011. It is also seen that the same has not been refuted by the learned counsel for the respondents.

(6) A bare perusal of Annexure A-6 (Pay drawn particulars of the applicant vis-à-vis his colleagues) and Annexure RJ-1 (RTI Reply) also clearly indicate that several of the colleagues/juniors of the applicant were granted Temporary Status earlier to him, and have been getting emoluments more than him. The learned counsel for the respondents has not furnished any reasons or grounds to justify how the applicant has been getting less emoluments than those who were junior to him. The learned counsel for the respondents has also not refuted or contested the detailed information provided by the learned counsel for the applicant in Annexure A-6 and RJ-1, nor contested the contention of the learned KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

counsel for the applicant that those who were regularised in time were getting more emoluments than the applicant. Moreover, no justification/grounds or reasons have been given by the learned counsel for the respondents for granting TSCL status to the applicant from the date of Order of the Tribunal. This appears to be totally arbitrary in nature.

(7) Thus, from the above facts and circumstances, it is very clear that this Tribunal, in its Order dated 12.9.2022 in OA 117/2016 directed that the applicant should be granted Temporary Status strictly as per the provisions of the 1993 Scheme as applicable to him. Nowhere does the Order of the Tribunal say that the applicant should be granted Temporary Status, from the date of its issue; and the inference drawn by the respondents in this regard is totally wrong. Accordingly, it is very clear that the applicant is entitled at least to grant TSCL and payment of all consequential benefits including all arrears from 12.03.2011 which is the date when all other similarly situated employees were granted TSCL. Hence, it is hereby ordered as follows:

(i) The Office Order bearing No. OA/117/2016-Adm – 999 dated 04.07.2023 (Annexure A-7) is quashed to the extent of grant of Temporary Status to the applicant, From the date of issue of that Order.

(ii) The respondents are directed to implement the Order dated 12.09.2022 in OA 117/2016 of this Tribunal by giving the applicant Temporary Status and by granting him arrears of pay and allowances at par with his colleagues/juniors i.e. from 12.03.2011 onwards.

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI

(iii) The above directions should be implemented by the respondents within eight weeks of receipt of the Certified Copy of this order.

(iv) All MAs, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

(v) No costs.

Sd/- (SANTOSH MEHRA)

MEMBER (A)

kr

KOMAL RANI

KOMA L RANI