dfa for postal employees

7/31/2019 Dfa for Postal Employees

1/9

APPENDIX A

FORM I

[RULE 4]

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

ACT, 1985

Title of the Case: Shri Ravi & Others Vs The Department of Posts, Mail Motor Service,Chennai-600006 & Others

INDEX

S. Nos. Description of documents relied upon Page No.

1. Application2.3.4.5.6.

Signature of the applicant

For use in Tribunals Office

Date of filing .

or

Date of Receipt by Post

Registration No. .

Signature

for Registrar


2/9

IN THE CENRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHENAI BENCH

A.B. (add description such as son of,Resident of and place of employment orlast employed.) APPLICANT

Versus

C.D. (add description and the residential or officialaddress on which the service of notices is tobe effected on the respondent or respondents.The details of each respondent are to be given

in a chronological order.) RESPONDENT

DETAILS OF APPLICATION:

1. Particulars of the order against which the application is made:

(Particulars of the order giving the details like the number, date and the authoritywhich has passed the order, against which the application is made).

sdiction of the Tribunal :

The applicant declares that the subject matter of the order against which hewants redressal is within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

tation :

The applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation periodprescribed in section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

s of the case :

(Give here a concise statement of facts in a chronological order, each paragraphcontaining as nearly as possible a separate issue or fact).

unds for relief with legal provisions:

6. Details of the remedies exhausted :

The applicant declares that he has availed of all the remedies available to himunder the relevant service rules etc.

(Give here chronologically the details of representations made and the outcometo such representations with reference to the number of Annexure to be given insupport thereof).


3/9

7. Matters not previously filed or pending with any other court :

The applicant further declares that he had not previously filed any application,writ petition or suit regarding the matter in respect of which this application has

been made, before any court or any other authority or any other Bench of theTribunal nor any such application, writ petition or suit is pending before any ofthem.

In case the applicants had previously filed any such application, writ petition orsuit, the stage at which it is pending, and if decided, the list of the decisionsshould be given with reference to the number of Annexure to be given in supportthereof.

8. Relief sought :

In view of the facts mentioned in para 6 above the applicant prays for thefollowing relief(s) :-

(Specify below the relief(s) sought explaining the grounds for such relief(s) andthe legal provisions, if any, relied upon).

9. Interim order, if any prayed for :

Pending final decision on the application, the applicant seeks the followinginterim relief :

(Give here the nature of the interim relief prayed for).

10. In the event of application being sent registered post, it may bestated whether the applicant desires to have oral hearing at the admission stageand if so, he shall attach a self addressed Post Card or Inland Letter, at whichintimation regarding the date of hearing could be sent to him.

11. Particulars of Banks Draft/Postal Order filed in respect of theapplication fee.

12. List of enclosures:

1.2.3.4.


4/9

VERIFICATION

I ..(Name of the applicant) S/o, W/o, D/o , age working as ..in the office of .., resident of, do hereby verify that the contents of paras .. to

.are true to my personal knowledge and parasto . believed to be true on legal advice and that I have not suppressed anymaterial fact.

Date : Place : ..

Signature of the applicant


5/9

The fact underlying in this instant case is that large number of contract appointments

were being made by the principal employer Postal Department without complying with

the relevant rules and procedure, even after several ban imposed on such

appointments. The issue relating to large scale illegalities committed in the making of

contract appointments has resulted irretrievable loss to the employees during their

course of such appointments.

The Department of Posts, Mail Motor Service , Chennai-600006 invited Tender on

behalf of the President of India for supply of man power for engagement of Drivers in

Mail Motor service , Chennai on 22 Jan 2009.(Exhibit - A)

The terms and conditions specifying to the contract for supply of manpower for the

contract employment of drivers in Mail Motor Service is appended as (Exhibit - B)

The Department of Posts, Mail Motor Service, Chennai-600006 has projected the

requirement of manpower for the drivers as 15 to 20 respectively with subject to a

variation as per the requirement during the period of contract. (Exhibit - C)

The Venus Enterprises has outsourced the manpower to The Department of Posts, MailMotor Service, Chennai-600006 since 22 Jan 2009. Accordingly 20 drivers were

appointed on the contract basis since 22 Jan 2009. However it is significant to note that

the Venus Enterprises has outsourced same contract labours who were providing the

service to the principal employer through the previous contractor. The nature of work

was also a core activity which involves various assignments given by the principal

employer. The activity involves the same efficiency, skill similar to the employees who

are permanently employed with principal employer.

The humble Submission by the petitioners is, such contract daily wage workers should

be paid minimum scale of pay as admissible based on the principle of 'equal pay for

equal work'. Daily rated contract casual labours employed under P and T Department


6/9

through the outsourcing were doing work similar to that of the regular workers of the

department.

The Venus Enterprises regularly issued the pay slip to the employees since 22 Jan

2009 and the amount credited and actually paid were contradictory, and varied from

month to month and were against the section 21 of the contract labours regulation &

abolition act 1970. Wages were not paid before the expiry of such period as prescribed.

The amount paid as wages were of short payment in nature, which is very evident from

the amount credited in the contract labours account and the amount reflected in the

salary slip. The principal employer was also negligent in payment of wages in full or the

unpaid balance due to the contract labours. Deduction form the salary by the contractorwithout any prior intimation to the employees was deliberately left unnoticed by the

principal employer. The period of remuneration were also not regularly maintained by

the Venus Enterprise for such appointed contract employees.

It is pertinent to note that pay slip issued by the Venus enterprises had included welfare

deductions such as ESI, PF which varied every month without any prior intimation to the

petitioners. After such deduction the contract labourers were deprived for the

entitlement. It also resulted in paid wages far less than the minimum pay payable under

the pay scales applicable to the regular employees belonging to corresponding cadres.

The respondents, however may, contend that since the petitioners belong to the

category of casual labour and are not being regularly employed, they are not entitled to

the same privileges which the regular employees are enjoying. It may be true that the

petitioners have not been regularly appointed but many of them have been working

continuously for more than a year with the principal employer and some of them have

been engaged as contract labourers for nearly 4years.

They are rendering the same kind of service which is being rendered by the regular

employees doing the same type of work. Clause (2) of Article 38 of the Constitution of


7/9

India which contains one of the Directive Principles of State Policy provides that "the

State shall, in particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income, and endeavor to

eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals

but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different

vocation

In the instant case the petitioners were subjected to hostile discrimination. It is urged

that such denial and discrimination amounts to exploitation of labour. The Venus

Enterprises cannot take advantage of its dominant position, as it is the outsourcing the

employees and compel any employee to work even on starving wages.

The employees have agreed to work on such low wages; they have done because they

had no other choice. It is poverty that has driven them to that state. The Government

should be a model employer, it is obvious that ordinarily no one would willingly supply

his labour or service to another for less than minimum wage, when he knows, that under

the law he is entitled to get minimum wage for the labour or service provided by him. It

may therefore be legitimately presumed that when a person provides labour or service

to another against receipt of remuneration which is less than the minimum wage, he is

acting under the force of some compulsion which drives him to work though he is paidless than what he is entitled under law to receive. Where a person is suffering from

hunger or starvation when he has no resources at all to fight disease or to feed his wife

and children or even to hide their nakedness, where utter grinding poverty has broken

his back and reduced him to a state of helplessness and despair and where no other

employment is available to alleviate the rigor of his poverty, he would have no choice

but to accept any work that comes his way, even if the remuneration offered to him is

less than the minimum wage. He would be in no position to bargain with the employer;

he would have to accept what is offered to him. While doing so he would be acting not

as a free agent with the choice between alternatives, but under the compulsion of

economic circumstances and the labour or service provided by him would be clearly

stated and classified as 'forced labour.'


8/9

The nature of jobs performed by the concerned contract employees is of purely

temporary nature but a core activity for the principal employer, and series of actions

taken by the Venus enterprises as against the employees outsourced to the P & T

Department reflects the domination over the employees by taking undue advantage of

their state which has driven to work in such low wages. It is significant to note when two

classes of employees perform identical or similar duties and carrying out the same

functions with the same measure of responsibility having same qualifications, they

would be entitled to equal pay. Denial of equality in pay amounts to violation of Articles

14 and 16 of the Constitution.

There is clearly no justification for doing so by the Venus Enterprises. Such an act is not

only violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution but also opposed to the spirit of

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966

which exhorts all States to ensure fair wages and equal wages for equal work. It is felt

that there is substance in the contention of the petitioners.

Several representations by the aggrieved employees were resulted in futile and resulted

with a threat of removing from employment. With no ray of hope aggrieved employees

has approached this Honble Tribunal. The sprit of Respondent is whollyunconstitutional, unreasonable and opposed to rules and policies. When a person

provides labour or service to another for remuneration which is less than the minimum

wage, the labour or service provided by him clearly falls within the scope and ambit of

the words forced labourunder Article 23. Such aggrieved person would be entitled to

come to the Court for enforcement of his fundamental right under Article 23 by asking

the Court to direct payment the minimum wage to him so that the labour or service

provided by him ceases to be 'forced labour' and the breach of Article 23 is remedied.

It is humbly prayed that the Honble Tribunal may be pleased to direct to pay minimum

wages to the petitioners.

Direct and may please choose date as justified by the Honble court for the purpose of

uniformity.


9/9

Direct Respondent No. 2 to consider the matter objectively and formulate a scheme for

regularization and remove such anomalies which exist in the existing system of

outsourcing.

In the interest of Law principle underlying in this instant case equal pay for equal work

may please be upheld.

Direct Respondent No2.that such types of outsourcing labour as not correct and tainted

with illegality, unfair and unreasonable that they shock the conscience of the Court.

They are opposed to public policy and require to be adjudged void."

As such order which the Honble Court may pleased to direct.

dfa for postal employees

Documents