{"id":188990,"date":"1990-04-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1990-04-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990"},"modified":"2018-01-06T18:30:12","modified_gmt":"2018-01-06T13:00:12","slug":"national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","title":{"rendered":"National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 1720, \t\t 1990 SCR (2) 340<\/div>\n
Author: M Rangnath<\/div>\n
Bench: Misra Rangnath<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nNATIONAL UNION OF ALL INDIA RADIOAND ORS. ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ETC.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/04\/1990\n\nBENCH:\nMISRA RANGNATH\nBENCH:\nMISRA RANGNATH\nSAWANT, P.B.\nRAMASWAMY, K.\n\nCITATION:\n 1990 AIR 1720\t\t  1990 SCR  (2) 340\n 1990 SCC  (3) 596\t  JT 1990 (2)\t 49\n 1990 SCALE  (1)670\n\n\nACT:\n    Constitution  of  India--Article 32--A.  1.\t R.  --Staff\nArtists--Continuation of contractual  employment--Justifica-\ntion for.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    Staff  Artists  of All  India  Radio\/Doordarshan,  after\ncomplying with the initial requirements, used to be appoint-\ned  to various positions like Announcer, News Readers,\tCon-\nductor, Music Compere, Instrumentalists, Producer and Script\nWriter etc., on contract basis upto the age of 55 years.  In\nMay  1982, Union of India bifurcated the Staff Artists\tinto\ntwo  categories\t like  (i) Staff Artists to  be\t treated  as\nartists\t and (ii) Staff Artists to be treated as  Government\nServants.  These two sets of writ petitions have been  filed\nby  the Staff artists challenging the said Government  deci-\nsion  conveyed through circular dated 3.5.1982\tand  calling\nupon  the staff to exercise option by the end  of  December,\n1983  for final allocation to the two categories  aforesaid.\nIn  the first writ petition direction is sought to  the\t re-\nspondents  to  treat the Staff Artists at par  with  regular\ngovernment  servants  and to restrain the  respondents\tfrom\nenforcing  their  direction in regard to their\texercise  of\noption and in the other writ petition, the petitioners\thave\nasked for a direction to treat the staff artists as  govern-\nment servants entitled to pensionary benefits.\n    The\t Court by its order dated 25.4.1988, on\t perusal  of\nthe  letter together with the scheme, Sent by  the  Director\nGeneral\t of All India Radio and following its earlier  deci-\nsion  in Civil Appeal No 384 of 1977 Union of  India  v.M.A.\nChowdhary, A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 1526 declared that all the staff\nartists of All India Radio are holding civil posts under the\nGovernment,  and they are governed by Article 311(2) of\t the\nConstitution and accordingly inter alia directed the Govern-\nment of India to review the entire situation and to  prepare\na  fresh scheme in accordance with law having regard to\t the\nnature of duties performed by each category of staff artists\nand  further directed the case to come up for directions  on\n5.9.1988.  Thereafter the Government of India  formulated  a\nscheme in compliance with the courts order and submitted  it\nto the Court.\n340\nDisposing of the writ petitions with directions, this Court,\n    HELD:  While dealing with the Artists as a class  it  is\nnecessary that their special status be borne in mind. It  is\na class of people who are indeed specially privileged either\nby  natural gift or by their own culturing of the art.\tThis\ncategory  of people cannot be equated with ordinary  Govern-\nment servants for every purpose. [348F]\n    The All India Radio and the Doordarshan in their  normal\nfunctioning  would  to\ta considerable\textent\tdepend\tupon\nqualitative  and  efficient artists in order to\t make  their\nprogrammes reach the desired level. [348G]\n    The\t age-old  practice of the job of the  staff  artists\nbeing contractual (whether short or long) is being given  up\nand  contractual employment is being substituted  by  status\nbased  Government  service. If there  are  really  efficient\nArtists\t of different classifications who do not want to  be\nbranded as Government servants, there is no immediate justi-\nfication  for  discontinuing and disturbing  them  in  toto.\n[348H; 349A]\n    Administrative  scrutiny instead of judicial  determina-\ntion  would  be more helpful. The Court\t therefore  directed\nthat  in the appropriate Ministry a High Power Committee  be\nset  up for examination of the objections with reference  to\nthe  terms of the scheme and the final decision be taken  by\nthe Government within six months. The views expressed in the\npresent\t decision be taken into account while  dealing\twith\nthe objections for purpose of finalising the scheme.  [349E;\nF-G]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    ORIGINAL  JURISDICTION:  Writ Petition  No.\t 13636\/83  &
\n11760-66\/84.\n<\/p>\n
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
\n    G.\tRamaswamy,  A.K.  Ganguli,  M.K.  Ramamurthy,  Kapil
\nSibal,\tR.K. Garg, S. Srinivasan, D.K. Garg, Ms.  A.  Subha-
\nshini, B. Parthasarthi, C.V. Subba Rao, M.A.  Krishnamurthy,
\nV.  Shekhar,  H.S. Mann, Ms. Chandan Krishnamurthy  and\t Ms.
\nKamini Jaiswal for the appearing parties.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n    RANGANATH MISRA, J. These are applications under Article
\n32  of the Constitution. Petitioner No. 1 in the first\tWrit
\nPetition is the
\n341<\/span>
\nNational Union of All India Radio Staff Artists;  petitioner
\nNo. 2 is an Announcer of the All India Radio and happens  to
\nbe the General Secretary of the Union; petitioners No. 3  to
\n8 are an instrumentalist, a few news readers, announcers and
\nthe  like. The petitioners in the other writ  petitions\t are
\nseven  in number consisting of six announcers and a  tanpura
\nplayer connected with the All India Radio. According to\t the
\npetitioners, the prevailing practice in All India Radio used
\nto  be\tto  offer appointments to various  people  as  Staff
\nArtists at the first instance ordinarily for an initial term
\nof three months and on completion of appropriate formalities
\nappointments used to be offered for a term of three years on
\ncontract basis at a minimum monthly fee. After the expiry of
\nthe  initial  period  of two years out of  the\tthree  years
\nperiod of working which was considered as a period of proba-
\ntion  contractual engagement up to the age of 55  years\t was
\nbeing made available. On selection, as alleged by the  peti-
\ntioners Staff Artists used to be appointed to various  posi-
\ntions  like Announcer, News Readers, Conductor,\t Music\tCom-
\npere,  Instrumentalists, Producer and Script Writer  in\t the
\nAll  India Radio or Producer, Production  Assistant,  Script
\nWriter, Translator and General Assistant in Doordarshan.
\n    In\tMay, 1982 the respondent Union of  India  bifurcated
\nthe Staff Artists into two categories like:
\n(1) Staff Artists to be treated as artists; and
\n(2) Staff Artists to be treated as Government Servants.
\n    This decision was conveyed in a letter dated 3.5.82\t and
\nopportunity  to\t exercise option to everyone by the  end  of
\nDecember,  1983 for final allocation to the  two  categories
\nwas provided. The letter stipulated that those of the  Staff
\nArtists who did not opt were to continue under the  existing
\nterms  and conditions. The first writ petition was filed  on
\n12th  December, 1983, challenging the Government’s order  of
\n3.5.82\t(Annexure 3) and for a direction to the\t respondents
\nto  treat the Staff Artists at par with\t regular  Government
\nservants  and  to restrain the\trespondents  from  enforcing
\ntheir direction for exercise of option.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t other group of writ petitions was filed on 19th  of
\nMarch,\t1984,  the challenge therein was also  to  the\tsame
\nGovernment letter, and petitioners asked for a direction  to
\nthe  respondents  to treat the Staff Artists  as  Government
\nservants entitled to pensionary benefits.
\nA return was made to the rule in the first writ petition  by
\nfiling an
\n342<\/span>
\naffidavit  by the Under Secretary, Ministry  of\t Information
\nand Broadcasting. The respondents maintained that the  Staff
\nArtists did not form one homogeneous group and job  require-
\nments of the Staff Artists were different from post to post.
\nIt was suggested that the Staff Artists could be convenient-
\nly divided into two groups, namely, those who are  appearing
\nor performing before the micro-phone and the others who\t are
\nmanaging production and connected jobs. It was also  pointed
\nout that all Staff Artists did not have the same terms as to
\nremuneration. It was suggested that the terms and conditions
\ngoverning the Staff Artists after their transformation\tinto
\nGovernment  servants became different. In the  interests  of
\nquality of broadcasting services, it was claimed, periodical
\nassessments became indispensable and inevitable. The affida-
\nvit further stated that the scheme which was enclosed to the
\nletter\tmarked Annexure 3 contained a scheme which had\tbeen
\nevolved\t after due deliberations and there was no  prejudice
\nto  the Artists if the scheme was allowed to  become  opera-
\ntive.\n<\/p>\n
    On\tthe 25th of April, 1988, with special  reference  to
\nthe  first writ petition and a connected civil appeal  which
\nis not before us at this stage, the Director-General of\t All
\nIndia Radio sent the following communication to the respond-
\nent’s  lawyer  with a request that the same  may  be  placed
\nbefore the Court. The letter stated:\n<\/p>\n
“Under the directions of Hon’ble Court, the Government\thave
\nfurther examined the aspects of the scheme for artist  cate-
\ngory  to safeguard the rights of the Staff Artists from\t any
\narbitrary  factors in respect of discharge of  duties  under
\ntheir  contract\t of  service  renewable\t after\tsatisfactory
\nperformance  of their services. After  careful\texamination,
\nthe Government have now set-up three types of committees  to
\nprotect\t the rights of the staff artist from  any  arbitrary
\nfactors which are as under:\n<\/p>\n
A. Since the renewal of contract is automatic if the records
\nare  satisfactory, it would be best to leave it to the\tSta-
\ntion Director or the Head of the Office concerned to  review
\nthe contract after verification of the records.
\nB.  In case, the records are not satisfactory, the  question
\nof renewal of contract may be considered by a Review Commit-
\ntee\/Representation Committee as under:\n<\/p>\n
B(i) Review Committee (Both for AIR\/Doordarshan)
\n343<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
(i) Station Director–Chairman\n<\/p>\n
(ii)  Two outside Assessors–Members who have  expertise  in
\nthe field to which the Artists belong.\n<\/p>\n
B(ii) Representation Committee
\n(Both for AIR\/Doordarshan)\n<\/p>\n
(i) Director General–Chairman
\nAddl. Director
\nGeneral (Programme)\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Deputy Director–Member General (Administration)\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Representatives of–Member the Ministry of Information
\nand Broadcasting.\n<\/p>\n
I  am  to request that a Government Counsel  may  please  be
\nbriefed accordingly to place the facts before the Honourable
\nCourt in the hearing today, i.e., dated 25th April, 88 at  2
\nP.M.”\n<\/p>\n
On the basis of what transpired in Court after referring  to
\nthe said letter, this Court on that date made the  following
\norder:\n<\/p>\n
“In  Civil  Appeal  No. 384 of 1977 Union  of  India  v.M.A.
\nChowdhary, AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1526 we have declared that
\nall  the Staff Artists of All India Radio are holding  civil
\nposts under the Government and they are governed by  Article
\n311(2) of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
\t In  view  of  the above decision it  is  no  longer
\nnecessary to make any further declaration in these petitions
\nthat the Staff Artists are Government servants. The Circular
\ndated  3rd May 1982 beating No. 45011\/26\/80\/B(A)  issued  by
\nthe Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government  of
\nIndia proceeded on the assumption that the Staff Artists who
\nhad  entered the service of the All India  Radio\/Doordarshan
\nunder  the contracts were not Government servants  and\tthat
\nonly  those  Staff Artists specifically\t mentioned  in\tthat
\nCircular could become and be treated as Government
\n344<\/span>
\nServants  provided they satisfied the  conditions  mentioned
\ntherein.  In view of the decision referred to above  it\t has
\nnow become necessary for the Government to review the entire
\nquestion  covered by the Circular dated 3rd May,  1982.\t We,
\ntherefore,  direct  the Government of India  to\t review\t the
\nentire situation and to prepare a fresh scheme in accordance
\nwith law having regard to the nature of duties performed  by
\neach  category\tof  Staff Artists. While  preparing  such  a
\nscheme\tthe  Government may also keep in view the  cases  of
\nStaff  Artists\twho have already exercised their  option  as
\nprovided  by the circular dated 3rd May, 1982.\tSuch  scheme
\nshall  be prepared on or before 31.7.1988. After the  scheme
\nis prepared a copy of it shall be made available to all\t the
\nparties to this case. The parties aggrieved may file  objec-
\ntions before this Court within August 15, 1988.
\n\t  This\tcase  shall come up for\t directions  on\t 5th
\nSeptember, 1988.”\n<\/p>\n
In terms of the direction given on the 25th of April,  1988,
\na  draft scheme framed by the Government has  been  produced
\nbefore\tthe  Court  along with\tan  accompanying  affidavit.
\nParagraph 2 of the said scheme states:\n<\/p>\n
“In  pursuance\tof the above mentioned orders,\tthose  Staff
\nArtists\t who  opted for becoming ‘Government  Servants’\t and
\nwere found fit by duly constituted Screening Committee\twere
\ntreated\t as Government Servants with effect from 6.3.  1982.
\nSuch Staff Artists were made entitled to the same pensionary
\nbenefits  as  are applicable to\t Government  Servants.\tThey
\nwere,  however, not entitled to any special benefits  avail-
\nable  to them as Staff Artists. Likewise, Staff\t Artists  in
\nthe  ‘Artists’\tcategory.  who opted for  being\t treated  as
\n‘Artists’ and come over to the new terms and conditions were
\ntreated as ‘Artists’ with effect from 6.3.1982.”
\nParagraph 3 provides:\n<\/p>\n
“The  following categories of Staff Artists\/Artists  in\t All
\nIndia Radio\/Doordarshan are, however, still to be treated as
\nGovernment Servants:\n<\/p>\n
345<\/span><\/p>\n
\t (i) Staff Artists who opted for ‘being declared  as
\n‘Government Servants’ but were not found fit by the  Screen-
\ning Committee;\n<\/p>\n
       (ii) Staff Artists who opted for being treated as
\n     ‘Artists’ category and were declared as ‘Artists’ after
\n     screening by the Screening Committee’;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t (iii) Staff Artists who opted for being treated  as
\n‘Artists’ but were not found fit by the Screening  Committee
\nfor being treated as ‘Artists’ and\n<\/p>\n
\t (iv) Staff Artists who did not opt for being treat-
\ned  as ‘Government Servants’ or for being treated  as  ‘Art-
\nists’.\n<\/p>\n
The scheme further indicates:\n<\/p>\n
“4. The Government has reconsidered the entire Scheme in the
\nlight of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered
\non  25.4.1988  in  Writ Petitions Nos.\t13636  of  1983\t and
\n11760-66  of 1984 in National Union of All India  Radio\t and
\nOthers\t.v. Union of India. In partial modification of\tthis
\nMinistry’s  letter No. 45001\/26\/80-B(A) dated  3.5.1982\t and
\nNo. 45011\/26\/80-B(A) dated 26.8.1983, it has been decided as
\nunder:–\n<\/p>\n
\t (i) All Staff Artists\/Artists working in All  India
\nRadio  and  Doordarshan (except foreign nationals)  will  be
\ndeemed\tas Government Servants holding civil posts  on\tpre-
\nscribed Central Government scales of pay.\n<\/p>\n
\t (ii) All such Staff Artists\/Artists working in\t All
\nIndia  Radio and Doordarshan will be entitled to  pensionary
\nand  other benefits on the same terms and conditions as\t are
\napplicable to other Government Servants holding civil posts.
\nThey  will  be\tgoverned by all rules  and  regulations\t and
\ngeneral instructions issued by Government from time to\ttime
\nlike  FR and SR, GFR, CCS (CCA) Rules, CCS  (Conduct)  Rules
\nand Pension Rules etc. etc. All facilities\/ benefits  avail-
\nable  to regular Central Government employees will be  auto-
\nmatically  applicable  to them also on the  same  terms\t and
\nconditions  as are applicable to regular Central  Government
\nservants. However, any special bene-\n<\/p>\n
346<\/span><\/p>\n
fit\/concession\tavailable to such Staff Artists\/Artists\t  of
\nAIR  and Doordarshan, in so far these are not in  accordance
\nwith rules and regulations and general instructions applica-
\nble  to Central Government servants, will be withdrawn\tfrom
\nthe date of issue of these orders.\n<\/p>\n
\t  (iii) The date of retirement on superannuation  in
\nrespect of such Staff Artists\/Artists of All India Radio and
\nDoordarshan  deemed as Government Servants will be the\tsame
\nas  applicable to holders of civil posts in Central  Govern-
\nment.\n<\/p>\n
\t  (iv)\tThe contribution of such Staff\tArtists\/Art-
\nists  working  in AIR and Doordarshan made  to\tContributory
\nProvident  Fund\t (CPF) along with interest thereon  will  be
\ntransferred to their General Provident Fund (GPF).”
\n“5. The Staff Artists\/Artists working in AIR and Doordarshan
\ndeemed\tas Government Servants will continue to be in  their
\nexisting categories and grades with regular pay scales.\t The
\nfuture\trecruitment to each grade will be made according  to
\nthe  Recruitment  Rules\t as per\t procedures  prescribed\t for
\nrecruitment to different posts.”\n<\/p>\n
“6.  The posts held by the Staff Artists\/Artists working  in
\nAll  India Radio and Doordarshan will stand  converted\tinto
\ncivil posts from the date of issue of these orders.”
\nThe order made by this Court on 25th of April, 1988, was not
\na  final judgment and this Court had directed the  Union  of
\nIndia to review the entire situation and to prepare a  fresh
\nscheme in accordance with law having regard to the nature of
\nduties performed by each of the categories of Staff Artists.
\nObviously, the intention of the Court while making the order
\ndated 25th April, 1988, was to have the scheme placed before
\nthe  Court  for consideration. Though the  scheme  has\tbeen
\nstyled as a draft scheme, its contents indicate that it\t has
\nbeen  implemented.  The main objection\tof  the\t petitioners
\nagainst\t the present scheme is the stipulation therein\tthat
\nthe Staff Artists will be taken as Government servants\tfrom
\nthe date of the order. According to them, the Allahabad High
\nCourt had in its decision dated 12th of July, 1974, given  a
\ndeclaration  that  all\tthe Staff  Artists  were  Government
\nservants and the said decision was affirmed by this Court in
\na  judgment  dated May 7, 1987, reported in 1987 3  SCR\t 424
\nUnion of
\n347<\/span>
\nIndia  v. M.A. Chowdhary. It is the contention of the  peti-
\ntioners that the benefit of conversion or declaration should
\nbe effective from 12.7.1974 and those who were in employment
\nthen  as  Staff Artists should be considered  as  Government
\nfrom this date and others who joined after 12.7.74 should be
\nconferred the status of Government servants from the date of
\njoining. There is also a claim by the petitioners to pension
\nfor those who have retired after 12.7.1974 and prior to\t the
\npresent\t scheme. It is the further contention of  the  peti-
\ntioners\t that  while  formulating  the\tpresent\t scheme\t the
\nCourt’s\t direction  of\t25th of April, 1988,  has  not\tbeen
\nstrictly  kept\tin view. Reliance has been  placed  on\tthis
\nCourt’s order dated 3rd April, 1984, where it was  indicated
\nthat failure of Staff Artists to exercise the option  should
\nnot  prejudice their right in any manner and either a  fresh
\nopportunity  to exercise the option should be given or\teven
\nin the absence of option the same benefits should be  given.
\nSome  of the objections which have been raised and  are\t no-
\nticed  above seem to be germane and  require  consideration.
\nThis  Court’s order of 25th April, 1988, requiring  a  fresh
\nscheme to be formulated obviously meant that the exercise of
\noption\tin terms of the order dated 3rd May, 1982,  was\t not
\ntaken to be the final date for exercise of option.  Opportu-
\nnity  to  exercise fresh option should have  been  given  or
\nperhaps the new scheme could have accepted the position that
\nunless\tone  wanted to be not absorbed he should  have\tbeen
\ndeemed to be accepting absorption. As in the changed setting
\nthe  class of Staff Artists was really intended to  be\tdone
\naway  with  in due course, such a deeming base\tshould\thave
\nbeen accepted for convenient implementation.
\n    One class of Staff Artists engaged under contracts wants
\nsuch status to continue. Otherwise stated, they do not\twant
\nthe contractual base to be changed into employment.
\n    While  dealing with the Artists as a class it is  neces-
\nsary  that  their special status be borne in mind. It  is  a
\nclass  of people who are indeed specially privileged  either
\nby  natural gift or by their own culturing of the art.\tThis
\ncategory  of people cannot be equated with ordinary  Govern-
\nment servants for every purpose. The All India Radio and the
\nDoordarshan in their normal functioning would to a consider-
\nable extent depend upon qualitative and efficient artists in
\norder to make their programmes reach the desired level.\t The
\nscheme\tnecessarily contemplates a transitional period.\t The
\nage-old\t practice  of  the job of the  Staff  Artists  being
\ncontractual  (whether short or long) is being given  up\t and
\ncontractual employment is being substituted by\tstatus-based
\nGovernment service. If there are really efficient Artists of
\ndifferent
\n348<\/span>
\nclassifications who do not want to be branded as  Government
\nservants, there is no immediate justification for discontin-
\nuing  and disturbing them in toto. The\ttransitional  period
\ncould  be elongated to accommodate the appropriate  category
\nof  Artists not willing to be absorbed as  Government  serv-
\nants.\n<\/p>\n
    Of\tlate, Government themselves are having a re-look  at
\nthe matter. It is their stipulation that All India Radio and
\nDoordarshan should be made into autonomous corporations\t and
\nfor  that purpose legislation is in the process. What is  in
\ncontemplation  is  contrary to what is in the  scheme.\tThis
\nmeans  that  the matter is still in a fluid  stage.  It\t is,
\ntherefore, appropriate that either a deeming position should
\nhave  been  accepted in the scheme as indicated above  or  a
\nfresh  opportunity for exercise of option should  have\tbeen
\nprovided.  Again, the demand of the above group\t of  artists
\nshould have also been considered.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t question  of deeming the  employees  as  Government
\nservants  from the date of the Allahabad High Court’s  judg-
\nment is another issue which requires examination.  Connected
\nwith it would be the question of entitlement to pension.  We
\nare of the view that these are aspects which should first be
\ninitially  examined by a Committee to be set up by the\tGov-
\nernment and after a definite view is taken it would be\topen
\nto  the\t petitioners to approach the  appropriate  Court  to
\nredress the remaining grievances, if any. The matter is such
\nthat administrative scrutiny instead of judicial  determina-
\ntion  would  be more helpful. We,  therefore,  refrain\tfrom
\nexpressing any final view. We reiterate that the order dated
\n25th of April, 1988, intended a draft scheme to be drawn  up
\nfor  consideration of the Court. The scheme as\tproduced  in
\nthe  Court  along with the accompanying affidavit  has\talso
\nbeen  described as a draft scheme. The objections raised  by
\nthe  petitioners  to the said scheme are  available  on\t the
\nrecord.\t We direct that in the appropriate Ministry  a\tHigh
\nPower Committee be set up for examination of the  objections
\nwith  reference\t to the terms of the scheme  and  the  final
\ndecision  be taken by the Government within six months.\t The
\nviews  expressed in the present decision be taken  into\t ac-
\ncount  while  dealing with the objections  for\tpurposes  of
\nfinalising  the\t scheme. Liberty is given to  the  aggrieved
\nparties\t when final decision is taken by Government to\tmove
\nthe Court.\n<\/p>\n
These writ petitions are disposed of with these\t directions.
\nNo costs.\n<\/p>\n
Y. Lal\t\t\t\t       Petition disposed of.\n349<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 1720, 1990 SCR (2) 340 Author: M Rangnath Bench: Misra Rangnath PETITIONER: NATIONAL UNION OF ALL INDIA RADIOAND ORS. ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ETC. DATE OF […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-188990","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nNational Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"National Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990\",\"datePublished\":\"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\"},\"wordCount\":2998,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\",\"name\":\"National Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"National Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"National Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990","datePublished":"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990"},"wordCount":2998,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990","name":"National Union Of All India ... vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1990-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-06T13:00:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-union-of-all-india-vs-union-of-india-and-another-etc-on-5-april-1990#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"National Union Of All India … vs Union Of India And Another Etc on 5 April, 1990"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188990","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=188990"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188990\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188990"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188990"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188990"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}