The Honourable Lieutenant Governor And ORS v. Andaman And Nicobar Forest Department Worker Union And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/38/2023 IA No.CAN/1/2023, CAN/2/2023 The Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor and others Vs.

Andaman and Nicobar Forest Department Worker Union and another Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the appellants Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the respondents November 20, 2023 [SR] Item No.16

1. The appeal is arising out an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 26th September, 2023 corrected on 27th September, 2023 in connection with the writ petition filed by the Trade Union claiming inter alia, the benefit of 1/30th of pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allowance.

2. The dispute arose with regard to the entitlement of all the person who claimed to be the members of the writ petitioner union. The appellant has contended that all of the persons named in the writ petitions are seasonal workers and they are not entitled to the said benefits. However, it appears that the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants not to disengage them till the disposal of the writ petition.

3. Presumably the Court proceeds on the basis that since the persons are found to be employed and the letter of

their initial appointment does not contain the word "seasonal" it shall be presumed that they are in continued employment. On such basis, we do not want to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge.

4. However, we make it clear that the order should be restricted to the persons whose identity has been disclosed in the writ petition and not the persons disclosed by the letter dated 7th October, 2023 by the Union in its communication to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.

5. The names of the persons who are not originally included in the writ petition cannot claim the benefit of the said order. However, this will not prevent the persons left out for being considered for such financial benefit if they could establish that they are similarly placed and circumstanced and advertently their names have been left out.

6. Mr. Chakraborty has submitted that some of the letters disclosed in the petitioner would show that they were engaged as a seasonal worker. However, they are letters as well to the contrary may be for a specified period.

7. In view of the aforesaid the application for consideration of the names of the persons not included in the list of employees is not entertained at this stage with the liberty given to the applicant to make a prayer on their behalf, if so advised, in the pending writ petition.

8. On the prayer of Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar, the time to file affidavit-in-reply in the pending writ petition is extended by ten days from date. The matter will be listed before the learned Single Judge in the next available Circuit Bench.

9. The appeal and the connected application stand disposed of , however, there shall be no order to costs. 10.

Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) ( Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J. )