Sunday, March 17, 2019

A Gramin Dak Sewak is not an “employee” under the 1972 Act: Supreme Court

REPORTABLE

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.3150  OF 2019

(Arising out of SLP (Civil) 7627  of 2019) Diary No. 41829 of 2018 Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices   …Appellant

Versus

Gursewak Singh & Ors.                              …Respondents

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3151   OF 2019

(Arising out of SLP (Civil)No. 7628  of 2019) Diary No. 41825 of 2018 Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices   …Appellant

Versus Smt. Swam Kanta                                          …Respondents

J U D G M E N T

 INDU MALHOTRA, J.

 1. Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.

2. A common question of law arises in both the appeals which are being disposed of by a common judgment. The facts in  Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices  v.  Gursewak Singh & Ors.  are being considered as the lead case.


3. The present Civil Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 01.12.2017   passed   by   a   Division   Bench   of   the   Punjab   & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in LPA No. 1612 of 2017. 

4. The factual matrix of the case, briefly stated, is as under: 

4.1. On 26.06.1991, Respondent No. 1 was engaged as a Gramin Dak Sewak i.e.  an Extra­Departmental Agent, to work   on   a  part­time  basis  in   the  Postal   Department   at Faridkot, Punjab. 

4.2. In 2014, Respondent No. 1 voluntarily resigned from the   said   part­time   job.   On   28.08.2014,   the   Department accepted   the   resignation,   and   Respondent   No.   1   was discharged with immediate effect.


4.3. Respondent   No.   1   approached   the   Controlling Authority­cum­Assistant   Labour   Commissioner,   Central 2 Jalandhar, seeking gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (herein after referred to as “the 1972 Act”).


4.4. The   Appellant   –   Department   took   the   stand   that Respondent   No.   1   was   not   entitled   to  ex­gratia  gratuity under   the  Gramin   Dak   Sewak  (Conduct  &   Engagement) Rules, 2011 as he had voluntarily resigned from the job. The   Controlling   Authority­cum­Assistant   Labour Commissioner,   Central   Jalandhar,  vide  Order   dated 21.09.2015, allowed the claim of Respondent No. 1 and directed   the   Department   to   pay   an   amount   of   Rs. 1,06,021/­   along   with   Interest   @   10%   p.a.   from 28.08.2014.


4.5. The Department filed an Appeal u/S. 7(7) of the 1972 Act, against the Order dated 21.09.2015 before the Deputy Chief   Labour   Commissioner   (Central)   Kendriya   Sadan, Chandigarh. The Appellate Authority  vide  Order dated 17.05.2016 dismissed the Appeal filed by the Appellant – Department, and   upheld   the   Order   dated   21.09.2015   passed   by   the 3 Controlling Authority­cum­Assistant Labour Commissioner, Central Jalandhar.

4.6. The Department filed C.W.P. No. 11412 of 2017 before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh under Article 226/227 of the Constitution against the Order dated 17.05.2016. The learned Single Judge vide Oder dated 23.05.2017 dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the Department relying upon earlier judgments passed by the same High Court in Senior Superintendent of Post Officers, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar    v.  Darshan   Ram   (through   LRs)   &   Ors.1 and Senior Superintendent of Post Officers v. Smt. Sham Duiari & Ors.2 4.7. The   Department   challenged   the   Order   dated 23.05.2017 passed by the Single Judge by way of LPA No. 1612 of 2017 before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. The   division   bench   of   the   Punjab   &   Haryana   High Court at Chandigarh on 01.12.2017, dismissed the LPA 1 2014 (9) SCT 120 (DB) 2 2006 (3) SCT 577 4 filed   by   the   Department   on   the   ground   that   SLPs   filed against the earlier judgments had been dismissed by this Court.   As   a   consequence,   the   judgment   of   the   learned Single Judge did not warrant interference. 4.8. The   Department   has   filed   the   present   Appeal   to challenge   the   Judgment   and   Order   dated   01.12.2017 passed by a division bench of the High Court.


5. We have heard the learned ASG Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee for the Appellant   –   Department.   Mr.   Bharat   Sangal,   Advocate   was appointed   as  Amicus   Curiae   vide  Order   dt.   10.12.2018   to represent the interest of the Respondents who did not appear, despite service being effected on them.  We have perused the pleadings and written submissions filed by both parties. 


6. The issues which arise for consideration are as follows: 

6.1. Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is an ‘employee’ as per Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act, and is entitled to payment of Gratuity under this Act?

6.2. Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is eligible for payment of Gratuity under the 2011 Rules upon voluntary resignation?

5 7. The   learned   ASG   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   Department submitted that :


7.1. The  Gramin   Dak   Sewaks  constitute   a   unique department of posts. The persons working as Gramin Dak Sewaks are not regular departmental employees but “extradepartmental agents”, who work on a part­time basis for a few hours every day; and, have an independent source of livelihood. They are permitted to work upto the age of 65 years.

7.2. The  Gramin  Dak Sewaks  are governed by the 2011 Rules, which form a complete and separate code providing for   the   recruitment,   gratuity,   conduct,   and   disciplinary proceedings of Gramin Dak Sewaks. The   terms   and   conditions   of   their   engagement   are governed by Rule 3­A of the 2011 Rules, which reads as under :

“3­A   Terms   and   Conditions   of Engagement

(i) A Sevak shall not be required to perform duty   beyond   a   maximum   Period   of   5 hours in a day; 

(ii) A Sevak shall not be retained beyond 65 years of age; 

(iii)A   Sevak   shall   have   to   give   an undertaking that he has other sources of 6 income besides the allowances paid or to be paid by the Government for adequate means  of  livelihood for himself  and his family;

 (iv)A   Sevak   can   be   transferred   from   one post/unit  to  another post/unit in public interest; 

(v) A Sevak shall be outside the Civil Service of the Union; 

(vi)A Sevak shall not claim to be at par with the Central Government employees; 

(vii) Residence   in   post   village/delivery jurisdiction of the Post Office within one month   after   selection   but   before engagement   shall   be   mandatory   for   a Sevak:;

Failure to reside in place of duty for GDS BPM & within delivery jurisdiction of the Post Office for other categories of Gramin Dak   Sevaks   after   engagement   shall   be treated   as   violative   of   conditions   of engagement   and   liable   for   disciplinary action under Rule 10 of the Conduct rules, requiring removal/dismissal;

 (viii) Post   Office   shall   be   located   in   the accommodation to be provided by Gramin Dak   Sevak   Branch   Postmaster   suitable for use as Post Office premises;  (ix)Combination of duties of a Sevak shall be permissible;” (emphasis supplied)


A reading of Rule 3­A(iii) of the 2011 Rules, makes it abundantly clear that a Gramin Dak Sewaks must have an independent means of livelihood. The Gramin Dak Sewaks are engaged on a part­time basis for a maximum of 3 to 5 hours a day. Rule 3­A(v) and (vi) stipulate that a  Gramin Dak Sewak shall be outside the Civil Service of the Union, 7 and shall not claim to be at par with the servants of the Government. 


7.3. It was further submitted on behalf of the Appellant – Department that the part­time employment of Gramin Dak Sewaks  is governed by a separate scheme, since they do not form part of the regular cadre, and cannot be treated to be   in   the   main   service   or   class   of   service.   Gratuity   is payable to them in accordance with the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011.  Rule 6(1) of the 2011 Rules provides for payment of exgratia  gratuity to  Gramin Dak Sewaks.  Rule 6(13) of the 2011 Rules provides that no gratuity is payable to a Gramin Dak   Sewak,  if he  resigns from the  agency  on  his own, except on medical grounds. 

Rule 6(1) and (13) of the 2011 Rules read as under :

 “(1)   Payment   of   ex­gratia   gratuity.   –  The question of grant of some kind of purely ex gratia monetary   grant   to   ED   Agents   working   in   the Indian   Posts   and   Telegraphs   Department   on termination   of   their   services   has   been   under consideration for a long time. It has been decided as follows :­ 1. ED   Agents   as   defined   in   P   &   T   Extra Departmental   Agents   (Conduct   and   Service) Rules, 1964,  whose  services  are  terminated otherwise than (i) for unsatisfactory word or (ii) as a measure of disciplinary action or (iii) in 8 consequence   of   their   being   appointed   in   a regular post under the P & T Department, may be   sanctioned   monetary   grants   termed   as ‘Gratuity’, provided that they have put in not less than ten years of continuous satisfactory service as Ed Agents.” “

(13) No gratuity to ED Agent who quits the agency on his own. – The question of extending the benefit of grant of ex gratia gratuity to ED Agents   who   have   to   resign   on   account   of circumstances beyond their control was taken up with the Ministry of finance. It has been decided that   no   ex   gratia   gratuity   will   be   paid   to   ED Agents in such cases. It is, therefore, clarified that according   to   the   present   orders,   gratuity   is payable only if the services of an ED Agent are terminated   in   consequence   of   an   action   of   the department, subject to their fulfillment of the other prescribed   conditions   and   that  no   gratuity   is payable if an ED Agent quits the agency on his own. The services of an ED Agent should not be terminated when he himself quits the job. In such cases, an order permitting the ED Agent to quit the services on his own should be issued so that the order may not be construed as an order of termination of service. ” (emphasis supplied)


8. Mr. Bharat Sangal, learned  Amicus Curiae, represented the interest of the Respondents  before this Court. The learned Counsel inter alia submitted that :


8.1. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies to every place defined as an ‘establishment’ within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in a state. 9 To   determine   the   applicability   of   the   Payment   of Gratuity Act, 1972 it must be seen whether the place is defined as an establishment under the law applicable to the State. Reliance was placed on the judgment of  State  of Punjab v. Labour Court Jalandhar3 wherein this Court held that   an   establishment   falling   within   the   definition   of Section 2(ii)(g) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 would be covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. It was contended that the Postal Department is an establishment   within   the   meaning   of   the   term   used   in Section 2(ii)(g) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and the 1972 Act, would be applicable to its employees.


8.2. Section 1(3) of the 1972 Act, provides for payment of gratuity   to   employees   of   every   factory,   mine,   oilfield, plantation, port, railway company, shop or establishment. Section 1(3) of the 1972 Act reads as under :

“1.Short   title,   extent,   application   and commencement.­ (3) It shall apply to­

(a) every factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port and railway company;

(b)   every   shop   or   establishment   within   the meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to shops and establishments in a State, 3 (1980) 1 SCC 4 10 in which ten or more persons are employed, or were   employed,   on   any   day   of   the   preceding twelve months;

(c)   such   other   establishments   or   class   of establishments, in which ten or more employees are employed, or were employed, on any day of the   preceding   twelve   months,   as   the   Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf.”  (emphasis supplied)


 8.3. It was further submitted that Section 14 of the 1972 Act,   specifically   provides   that   the   Act   would   apply “notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other enactment”.  Section 14 of the 1972 Act reads as under : “14. Act to override other enactments, etc.— The   provisions   of   this   Act   or   any   rule   made thereunder   shall   have   effect   notwithstanding anything   inconsistent   therewith   contained   in   any enactment other than this Act or in any instrument or contract having effect by virtue of any enactment other than this Act.”


8.4. Section 4(1)(b) of the 1972 Act provides that gratuity would be payable to an employee even on his resignation. Thus, any rule barring payment of gratuity to an employee who resigns, would be contrary to Section 14 read with Section 4(1)(b) of the 1972 Act. 11 8.5. It was further submitted that the Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001 were superseded and replaced by the Department of Posts, Gramin   Dak   Sewak  (Conduct   and   Engagement)   Rules, 2011. Under   the   amended   2011 Rules   the   term “employment/appointment”   has   been   replaced   by “engagement”. The amended Rule 6 pertains to payment of ex gratia Gratuity to Gramin Dak Sewaks.


9. The first issue to be determined is whether a  Gramin Dak Sewak is an ‘employee’ as per Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act, and is entitled to payment of Gratuity under this Act?


9.1. Section   1(3)(b)   of   the   1972   Act   applies   to   every ‘establishment’ within the meaning of “any law” for the time being in force.  This   Court   in  State   of   Punjab  v.  Labour   Court Jalandhar4 has held that there is no reason for limiting the meaning of the expression ‘law’ in Section 1(3)(b) of the 1972 Act.  4 (1980) 1 SCC 4 12 The Postal Department is as an establishment under Section 2(k) of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 which reads as under : “2. Definitions.­ (k)   the   expression  “Post   Office”   means   the department,   established  for   the   purposes   of carrying the provisions of this Act into effect and presided over by the Director General.” (emphasis supplied) The Indian Post Office Act, 1898 would fall under the expression ‘law’ in Section 1(3)(b). Consequently, the Post & Telegraphs Department would be an establishment under the 1972Act.


9.2. Section 4(1) of the 1972 Act, provides for payment of Gratuity   to   an   employee   on   the   termination   of   his employment, subject to the condition that he must have rendered a minimum of 5 years’ continuous service.  Section 4(1) of the 1972 Act reads as under : “4. Payment of Gratuity.­  (1) Gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years,­ (a) on his superannuation, or (b) on his retirement or resignation, (c) on his death or disablement due to accident or disease: Provided that the completion of continuous service of five years shall not be necessary where the 13 termination of the employment of any employee is due to death or disablement: Provided   further   that   in   case   of   death   of   the employee, gratuity payable to him shall be paid to his nominee or, if no nomination has been made, to his heirs, and where any such nominees or heirs is minor, the share of such minor, shall be deposited   with   the   Controlling   Authority   who shall invest the same for the benefit of such minor in such bank or other financial institution, as may be prescribed, until such minor attains majority. Explanation.­   For   the   purposes   of   this   section, disablement   means   such   disablement   as incapacitates an employee for the work which he was capable of performing before the accident or disease resulting in such disablement.” (emphasis supplied)


9.3. Section 4 of the 1972 Act, states that “Gratuity shall be payable to an employee”.  The term ‘employee’ is defined by Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act, as under : “2.   Definitions.­   In   this   Act,   unless   the context otherwise requires,­ (e) “employee” means any person (other than an apprentice) who is employed for wages, whether the   terms   of   such   employment   are   express   or implied,   in   any   kind   of   work,   manual   or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of a factory,   mine,   oilfield,   plantation,   port,   railway company, shop or other establishment to which this Act applies,  but does not include any such person   who   holds   a   post   under   the   Central Government   or   a   State   Government   and   is governed   by   any   other   Act   or   by   any   rules providing for payment of gratuity;” (emphasis supplied) 14 Section   2(e)   of   the   1972   Act,   however   specifically excludes persons who are governed by any Act, or Rules providing for payment of Gratuity. 

9.4. Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act excludes persons who hold a   post   with   the   Central   or   State   Government   and   are governed by any other Act or rules providing for payment of gratuity. Gramin   Dak   Sewaks  are   engaged   as   Extra Departmental Agents, a post governed by the 2011 Rules.5 These   Rules   have   a   separate   provision   for   payment   of Gratuity to the Extra Departmental Agents. 

A Gramin Dak Sewak is not an “employee” under the 1972 Act.  The first issue is answered accordingly. 

10. The second issue is whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is eligible for payment of Gratuity upon voluntary resignation under the 2011 Rules?

10.1. The 2011 Rules provide that Gramin Dak Sewaks are Extra­Departmental   Agents,   who   are   outside   the   Civil Service of the Union, and shall not claim to be at par with  the   Central   Government   Employees.   The   ExtraDepartmental Agents are engaged by the Department of Posts & Telegraphs to cater to the postal requirements in the rural and remote areas. The system avails the services of schoolmasters, shopkeepers, landlords, and such other persons in a village who have a reasonable standard of literacy,   and   adequate   means   of   livelihood,   and   can therefore assist the Department on a part­time basis by way of gainful avocation, to provide service to the rural communities for their postal requirements.

Rule 3­A(i) of the 2011 Rules provides that the Gramin Dak Sewaks shall not be required to perform duties beyond a   maximum   period   of   5   hours   a   day.   This   shows   the avocational nature of the service.  Rule 6(1) of the 2011 Rules provides for payment of gratuity to Gramin Dak Sewaks. However, Rule 6(13) states that no Gratuity is payable if an Extra­Departmental Agent quits the agency on his own. 

10.2. In the present case, Respondent No. 1 tendered his resignation in 2014. The Appellant – Department accepted 16 his   resignation  vide  letter   dated   28.08.2014.   The   Order dated 28.08.2014 accepting the resignation of Respondent No. 1 reads as under :

“   The  unconditional   resignation   dated   nil submitted by Sh. Gursewak Singh from the post of GDSBPM Assa Butter in a/c with Bariwala SO is hereby accepted with immediate effect. Usual   charge   Reports   should   be   sent   to   all concerned. Sd/­ THE SUPDT OF POST OFFICES  FARIDKOT DIVISION FARIDKOT – 151203 ”  (emphasis supplied)

The   Order  was  passed  under  Rule  6(13)  permitting Respondent No. 1 to quit the services of the  Gramin Dak Sewak as per his voluntary resignation. As a consequence of his resignation, Respondent No. 1 became disentitled from the payment of Gratuity under the statutory 2011 Rules applicable to  Gramin Dak Sewaks. The second issue is answered accordingly.

11. The Impugned Orders passed by the High Court in both the Appeals are hereby set­aside.  We acknowledge the valuable assistance provided by the learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Bharat Sangal in representing the interest of the Respondents. 17 Pending   applications   in   both   the   Appeals,   if   any,   are dismissed. The Appeals are allowed accordingly.

…...........................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT) …..……………………J. (INDU MALHOTRA)

New Delhi, March 15, 2019. 18

No comments: