JAGANATH KHORA vs Central Silk Board, M/o Textiles on 5 November 2026

O R D E R

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

According to the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, on 01.03.1995, he was engaged under the respondents as casual worker and, therefore, he is entitled to be conferment of temporary status as per the DoP&T OM dated 10.09.1993, which was duly adopted by the Respondent-department vide circular dated 23.03.2016 effective from 01.07.2015. He submitted representation seeking conferment of temporary status as per the Circular dated 23.03.2016. According to him, since, the respondents-department did not pay any heed to his representation, he has filed this OA praying inter alia as under: “(i) To quash the condition imposed at Para-5(1) Temporary Status will be conferred on all the eligible SFWs who are in employment in CSB as on 01.09.1993 under Ann.-A/3;

(ii) And/or to direct the Respondents to grant temporary status w.e.f., 01.09.1993 like O.M dtd. 10.09.1993 instead of 01.07.2015 as stipulated at Para-5(I) of circular under Ann.-A/3;

(iii) And/or to direct the Respondents to impose the condition regarding completion of 240 days in a calendar year and should be in-service as on 01.07.2015 to get temporary status w.e.f., 01.07.2015 applying the same formula of O.M dtd. 10.09.1993.

RAVI KUMAR

(iv) And to direct the respondents to grant temporary status w.e.f., 01.07.2015 and grant all consequential financial benefits; And pass any other order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the interest of justice; And for which act of your kindness the applicant as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

2. According to the respondents, this OA has no legs to stand for on fats and law and therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed in limine and in this regard, the stand taken by the respondents in their counter has been reiterated by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents in course of hearing to the effect that Para 3 of the Casual Labourers Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization Scheme of Government of India, 1993 states that the said scheme is applicable to casual labourers in employment of the Ministries/Departments of Govt. of India and there attached and subordinate offices on the date of issue of the orders but it shall not be applicable to casual workers in Railways, Departments of Tele Communication and Department of Posts, who already have their own schemes. Central Silk Board is an Autonomous Organization created under the Statute and RAVI KUMAR

DoPT has clarified, time and again, that such schemes do not automatically apply to the autonomous Organization/Boards, etc. and therefore the Ministry of Textiles considered the proposal of Central Silk Board to extend the benefits of the Temporary Status Scheme under the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Gol, 1993 to the eligible skilled farm workers of Central Silk Board subject to the procedures as detailed therein Further the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Union of India and others V/s Mohan Pal, etc., in SLPs (Civil) No.2224/2000, held that the Scheme of 1993 is not an ongoing scheme and the temporary status can be conferred on the casual labourers under the scheme, who fulfilled the conditions stipulated in Clause 4 of the said Scheme viz. the casual labourers should be in employment on the date of the commencement of the scheme and they should have rendered continuous service of at least one year, i.e. 240 days in a year or 206 days in case of offices having five days a week. As per the provisions, it was approved by the Silk Board to make the Scheme applicable to the causal labourers w.e.f. 01.07.2015 vide Resolution dated RAVI KUMAR

13.07.2015. The Scheme has been made applicable to around 1900 eligible Farm Workers and the cut off dated fixed as 01.09.1993 as per the original scheme of DoPT. The applicant was engaged as a casual labourer on daily wage basis in 1995 and was converted to Time Scale Farm Worker w.e.f. 01.03.1997, thus, he is not eligible for the Temporary Status as mentioned in OM 1993 as per the Scheme approved by the Board and conveyed vide letter dated 23.03.2016.

3. Heard.

4. According to Ld. Counsel for the applicant, it is the case of the respondents that the Scheme of 1993 is not an ongoing scheme, which has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohan Pal (supra). Admittedly, respondents-department issued Circular on 23.03.2016 in which in para 5(i) they have put two conditions for grant of Temporary Status, which is not in consonance with the Scheme of 1993. As per the DoPT Scheme of 1993, Temporary Status is conferred upon a casual labourer subject to fulfillment of the conditions stipulated therein whereas the date of temporary status as per circular dated RAVI KUMAR

23.03.2016 is 01.07.2015. Hence, by fixing the date 01.07.2015 for grant of temporary status the Respondents have violated the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court as because grant of temporary status w.e.f. 1.7.2015 proves that grant of temporary status scheme is an ongoing scheme. In terms of the circular dated 23.03.2016, a casual labourer of Central Silk Board has to fulfill the conditions made in Scheme of 1993 for conferment of Temporary Status w.e.f. 01.07.2015. Hence, non-conferment of temporary status on the applicant, who was engaged on 01.03.1995 is bad in law. This contention of the applicant was vehemently opposed by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents in stating that the applicant misread the conditions stipulated in the circular dated 23.03.2016 wherein it has specifically been stated that the Temporary Status will be conferred on the casual workers engaged under them w.e.f. 01.07.2015 provided such causal laborers were in engagement and completed 240/206 days, as the case may be, as on the date of issue of the Scheme by the DoP&T. It is also stated that the applicant being conscious that as per the conditions stipulated in the circular dated RAVI KUMAR

01.07.2015, as a matter of policy has in this OA sought to quash the conditions in the OA and, on the other hand, effort is made to justify his case, which is impermissible in law. It is also stated that putting the condition in the circular was a matter of policy and in such policy matter judicial interference is not warranted especially when the said policy decision was taken absolutely in consonance with the provisions of the 1993 Scheme and the conditions stipulate din the Scheme 1993 having not been challenged, the arguments advanced by the applicant false flat.

5. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the record.

6. It is not in dispute that the 1993 Scheme issued by the DoPT, Temporary Status would be conferred on all causal 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). The applicant also admitted that in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohan Pal (supra), the RAVI KUMAR

scheme is not an ongoing scheme. The respondents-department issued circular on 23.03.2016 stating therein in paragraph 5 that temporary status will be conferred on all the eligible SFWs who are on employment in CSB as on 01.09.1993 and who have rendered continuous service of at least one year as on the said date and continue to remain in the service of the Board as on 01.07.2015 and the implementation of TSS to all such eligible SFWs is w.e.f. 01.07.2015, which is the date of approval of the Board for the implementation of the said Scheme. The argument advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant does not hold any water because being conscious of the conditions stipulated in para 5 of the circular dated 23.03.2016, the applicant has prayed to quash the said condition that Temporary Status will be conferred on all the eligible SFWs who are in employment in CSB as on 01.09.1993. Now, in course of hearing, he veered round in arguing that since the Scheme was made effective from 01.07.2015, the Scheme of 1993 is ongoing Scheme, which is not acceptable in law. The Circular dated 26.03.2016 is nothing but repetition or reiteration of the conditions stipulated in DoP&T RAVI KUMAR

OM issued in 1993 as a matter of policy and law is well settled that the Tribunal is a loath to interfere in the policy decision of the Government. Since, the DoP&T as well as the respondents’ department issued the OM/Circular as a matter of policy and as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohan Pal (supra), the applicant, having engaged on 01.03.1995, does not qualify by the conditions stipulated in the policy decision for conferment of temporary status. Hence, it is established that this OA lacks merit.

7. In the result, the OA stands dismissed along with MA, if any pending, by ordering the costs easy.

(Pramod Kumar Das)

(Sudhi Ranjan Mishra) Member (Admn.)

Member (Judl.)

RK/PS

RAVI KUMAR