30th June retirees case - Supreme Court passed comments- noncompliance costs as well as interest may be imposed.

 From Kayveeyes’ Desk  - Demands with Details

Let us discuss about the issues confronting the Postal employees dispassionately. 

1. Irregular Separate Categorisation of HSG II & HSG I as a Separate Cadre for Membership Verification

1. In the landmark case of Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board vs. A. Rajappa & Others (AIR 548, 1978), a seven-member bench of the Supreme Court, in its judgment delivered on February 21, 1978, directed the Government of India to clearly and define the term "industry." The aim was to dispel ambiguity and resolve the recurring controversies surrounding the interpretation of "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Court urged the Ministry of Labour to clarify the scope of the term, thereby ensuring consistent application of the Act.

2. Following the Supreme Court’s directions, the Ministry of Defence, in compliance with the Ministry of Labour, issued a circular (OM No. F 26(1)/78/D(JCM) dated March 18, 1981), listing the industries under the Government of India. This list included postal workers, along with Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS), as part of the industrial sector, featured under Serial No. 37. The inclusion of postal employees was a unanimous decision by the government, marking them as "industrial workers."

3. As a result of this classification, postal unions and their employees were brought under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. Consequently, postal employees, recognized as industrial workers, became eligible for the Productivity Linked Bonus (PLB), a benefit granted to operative departments declared as industries by the Ministry of Labour. This classification affirmed the status of postal employees within the industrial framework.

4. Despite their classification as industrial workers, the Department of Posts sought to bring postal unions under the Recognition of Service Associations (RSA) Rules, which typically apply to government employees not recognized as industrial workers. Initially, during the verification process in 1995, major postal unions refused to participate in the process. However, after extensive discussions, the unions agreed to accept the RSA Rules, provided their existing union structures were retained. This agreement paved the way for their participation in the subsequent membership verification process conducted in 1997, as per the Department’s notification dated December 19, 1996. The Group C cadre, including Postal Assistants, LSG, HSG II, and HSG I, was consolidated into a distinct category.

5. There is no justifiable reason to separate the existing unified category into Postal Assistants and Supervisors, as they form a homogenous group. Such a division would adversely affect the interests of the officials and weaken collective bargaining. The coordination and unity among these cadres would be disrupted if they are separated from one another.

6. As per Clause 5(c) of the Central Civil Services (Recognition of Service Association) Rules, 1993:

"Membership of a Service Association has been restricted to a distinct category of Government servants having common interests, all such Government servants being eligible for membership of the Service Association."

7. Furthermore, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), in its OM No. 2/2/94-JCA dated 22nd April 1994, clarified common points of doubt raised by various Ministries and Departments. Regarding the interpretation of "distinct category" in Rule 5(c), the clarification stated:

"A 'distinct category' refers to an association whose members share a commonality of interest and function as a homogenous group."

8. The Department of Posts has categorised Postal Assistants and all allied cadres, including LSG, HSG-II as the distinct cadre since 1997, the unions are allowed on this pattern to participate in the membership verification. 

9. Subsequently the DOPT has further clarified vide its NO.3/12/94-JCA dated 10.3.1995 that there is no objection to the existing association retaining their entity or a class or group being treated as a category provided there is no administrative problem or there is no clash of interest among the constituents of the association.

10. Based on the above guidelines issued by the nodal ministry DOPT, the Department of Posts has classified the Postal Asst, LSG, HSG II, HSG I & HSG I NFG as distinct category since all the posts are hierarchical promotional cadres of the Postal Assts.

11. It is pertinent to mention that the work of the LSG, HSG II, HSG I  & HSG I NFG are similar kind of supervisor but having more responsibility. But the rules and regulations and the nature of duties are one and similar which is a part of promotion and the categorisation cannot be divided on the basis of reclassification of posts like making HSG as Group B cadre.

12. .Now, the Department of Posts initiated action to confer Gazettee status to HSG I. If so they cannot continue the newly formed unions and the newly formed union will confine only with HSG II for a meagre membership.

In light of the above, the Secretary (Posts) should reconsider and withdraw the proposal to classify Supervisors as a distinct category. This move would not only deviate from the earlier categorisation but also violate the DoPT instructions and assurances provided during the implementation of the RSA Rules, 1993.