Calcutta High Court Upholds Tribunal Ruling: Railway Quasi Employees Denied Regularization
Asansol Co-operative Store Employees running a canteen on railway premises cannot claim regularization or absorption in railway service without proof of employer-employee relationship or fulfillment of statutory requirements for recognition as a non-statutory canteen.
News Report:
In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the Eastern Railway Quasi Employees Union challenging the Central Government Industrial Tribunal's (CGIT) decision, which denied the regularization and absorption of quasi-employees from the Asansol Railway Men's Cooperative Stores Limited into railway service. The judgment, delivered by Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) on September 17, 2025, reinforces the tribunal's stance on the absence of an employer-employee relationship between the railway administration and the cooperative society's employees.
The case centers around the employees of the Asansol Railway Men's Cooperative Stores Limited, a cooperative society operating canteens on railway premises at Asansol, who sought recognition as railway employees. Their demand followed the forcible lockout of the canteen premises by the railway management on December 19, 2005, amid a relay hunger strike by the employees demanding regularization. The petitioners argued that some quasi-workers had previously been absorbed into railway service, suggesting a tacit acknowledgment of their employment status.
The tribunal, however, found that the cooperative society did not qualify as a non-statutory recognized railway canteen under the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM), due to non-compliance with requisite statutory conditions. The absence of an amended bye-law permitting railway administration supervision, lack of an executed agreement per IREM provisions, and no formal employer-employee relationship were key factors in the tribunal's decision.
Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) upheld the tribunal's award, agreeing that the cooperative society's employees could not be regularized as railway employees without fulfilling conditions laid out in the Supreme Court's judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi. The court emphasized that mere appearance before a screening committee does not confer an automatic right to regularization, and conditions such as sanctioned posts and necessary qualifications must be met.
The judgment underscores the distinction between statutory and non-statutory canteens, and the implications for employment status. The court noted that the petitioners, as employees of an autonomous cooperative society, were not entitled to railway employee status merely by virtue of complementary facilities like railway passes and medical benefits. The ruling affirmed that benefits provided were welfare measures, not indicative of an employment relationship.
In dismissing the writ petition, the court concluded that the tribunal's findings were grounded in law and facts, thus requiring no intervention. The decision reaffirms the legal interpretation of employer-employee relationships in quasi-administrative contexts within railway premises.
This ruling is likely to have implications for other quasi-employees seeking similar recognition and regularization, reinforcing the necessity for statutory compliance and formal employer-employee relationships in claims for absorption into railway service. The judgment also highlights the judicial scrutiny applied to employment claims within cooperative structures operating on railway premises.
Eastern Railway Quasi Employees Union v. Union of India, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2780240
