TA No. 411/2009. Case: 1. All India I.T.D.C. Workers Union (Regd.), (Affiliated to I.N.T.U.C.), Through its S. S. Hans, President, 2. Mahinder Singh Rana, 3. Raghvendra Shukla, New Delhi, 4. Ran Bahadur Singh, 5. Sachin Attrey, 6. Sunil Bhatia, 7. Kushal Kumar Talwar, 8. Bharat Bhushan, 9. Chander Bhushan Soni, 10. Sandeep Kumar Gupta, 11. Avnish Dimri, 12. Rajesh Atri, 13. Naeem Ashraf, 14. Dheeraj Sharma, 15. Alka, 16. Sunita Chandel, 17. Ratnakar Dandia, 18. Devendu Shekar Vs India Tourism Development Corporation Limited, Through its C.M.D.. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberTA No. 411/2009
CounselManinder Acharya, Vikram Sethi, B. B. Sawhney, Amit Seth
JudgesShanker Raju (Judicial Member) & Dr. Veena Chhotray (Accountant Member)
IssueAdministrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 14(2); Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 311(2)
Judgement DateJanuary 29, 2010
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal


Shanker Raju (Judicial Member), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)

  1. Applicants, all India ITDC Workers Union and 17 others, working as Cashier-cum-Sales Assistants in duty free shops operated by the ITDC at Indira Gandhi International Airport, which includes 13 applicants working in duty free shops whereas applicants No.11, 10, 17 and 7 are not working in the duty free shops, on contract basis have sought through this TA a direction, declaring them to be in regular employment with all consequential benefits and release of their annual increments.

  2. A brief factual matrix, relevant to be highlighted, transpires that all over India ITDC on a licence are operating 10 duty free shops at different International Airports, viz. Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Chennai & Trivendrum at arrival and departure lounges and selling imported items. Applicants from time to time right from the year 1994-1996 have been appointed as Cashier-cum-Sales Assistant in these shops on contract basis, which is co-terminus with the expiry of the term of contract on a basic pay in IDA pattern. It is also stipulated that their services are liable to be terminated at any time without notice and without stating any reason. Applicants continued till 2000 on extension. Applicants were not given any increments but their counterparts at Mumbai were given the increments, which is assailed in a representation to the respondents. Apprehending their termination the applicants have approached the High Court of Delhi for regularization in the present CWP (TA).

  3. On 27.11.2000 regarding continuance of the applicants status quo was ordered by the High Court of Delhi.

  4. An additional affidavit filed by the applicants on 17.11.2000 sought increments on the analogy that identically situated employees at Mumbai have since been paid annual increments, non-grant is an invidious discrimination.

  5. Respondents filed their reply where their stand was that the employment of the applicants being contractual and co-terminus with the duration of the licence given to ITDC for running duty free shops by the International Airports Authority of India (IAAI), the TA deserves to be dismissed.

  6. CM-1061/2007 to dismiss the CWP (TA) as infructuous and to vacate the status quo order dated 27.11.2000 was also filed by the respondents, wherein they have stated that on 30.6.2006 the successor-in-interest of IAAI, i.e., M/s Delhi International Airport Private Limited (DIAL) had entered into a fresh licence agreement with ITDC for running of the duty free shops at the IGI International Airport till 31.12.2006. Thus vide communication dated 28.11.2006 the DIAL called upon ITDC to wind up its...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT