Holding

The Court refrained from a definitive judicial ruling on the status and pension rights of staff artists, directing a High‑Power Committee to examine objections to the draft scheme and to finalize the scheme within six months.

Summary

The petitioners, staff artists of All India Radio and Doordarshan, challenged a 1982 government circular that bifurcated them into "artists" and "government servants" and required them to exercise an option to choose their status. They sought parity with regular civil servants, pension rights, and a declaration that all staff artists were government servants under Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The Court recalled its earlier decision in Union of India v. M.A. Chowdhary, which held that staff artists occupy civil posts governed by Article 311(2), and directed the Government to prepare a fresh scheme reflecting the nature of duties of each category. While acknowledging the special status of artists, the Court held that the complex issues of retroactive conversion, pension entitlement, and the adequacy of the scheme are better resolved through administrative scrutiny. Accordingly, a High‑Power Committee was ordered to examine objections to the draft scheme and the Government was instructed to finalize the scheme within six months, with parties free to approach the Court thereafter. The writ petitions were disposed of with these directions and no costs were awarded.

Issues considered

Whether staff artists of All India Radio and Doordarshan are government servants under Article 311(2) of the Constitution.
Whether the 1982 circular and its option scheme are valid and enforceable.
Whether staff artists are entitled to pensionary benefits on par with regular civil servants.
Whether the scheme converting contractual employment to civil service status can be applied retrospectively.
Whether judicial determination is appropriate or the matter should be resolved administratively.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 311(2), s. Article 32

Subjects

Staff artistsGovernment servantsContractual employmentPension rightsAll India RadioDoordarshanArticle 311Article 32High Power CommitteeScheme

Judgment

NATIONAL UNION OF ALL INDIA RADIO
A
AND ORS. ETC.
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ETC. ~

;A
APRIL 5, 1990
B
[RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ]

Constitution of India-Article 32-A.I.R.-Staff Artists-Con-
tinuation of contractual employment-Justification for.
-~
c Staff Artists of AU India Radio/Doordarsh~n, after complying
with the initial requirements, used to _)Je appointed t~ various positions
like Announcer, News Readers, Conductor, Music Compere, Instru-
mentalists, Producer and Script Writer etc., on contract basis upto the

D
age of 55 years. In May 1982, Union of India bifurcated the Staff Artists _
into two categories like (i) Staff Artists to be treated as artists and (ii)
_,..,.
Staff Artists to be treated as Government Servants. These two sets of
writ petitions have been filed by the Staff artists challenging the said
Government derision conveyed through circular dated 3.5.1982 and
calling upon the staff to exercise option by the end of December,
1983 for final allocation tO the two categories aforesaid. In the first writ
E petition direction is sought to the respondents to treat the Staff Artists
at par with regular government servants and to restrain the respon-
dents from enforcing their direction in regard to their exercise of option . ,...,...
and in the other writ petition, the petitioners have asked for a direction
to treat the staff artists as government servants entitled to pensionary
benefits.
F
The Court by its order dated 25.4.1988, on perusal of the letter •
together with the scheme_, ~nt by the Director General of All India
Radio and following its earlier oecision in Civil Appeal No 384 of 1977
Union of India v. M.A. Chowdhary, A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 1526 declared

G
that all the staff artists of All India Radio are holding civil posts under
the Government, and they are governed by Article 311(2) of the
--
Constitution and accordingly inter alia directed the Government of
India to review the entire situation and to prepare a fresh scheme in
accordance with law having regard to the nature of duties performed by
each cate~ory of staff artists and further directed the case to come up

H
for directions on 5. 9.1988. Thereafter the Government of India for-
mulated llSCbeme in Compliance with the collrts order and submitted it to
the Court.
340
•
N.U.A.I.R. & ORS.v. U.0.1. & ANR. !MISRA, J.J 341

Disposing of the writ petitions with directions, this Court,
A
HELD: While dealing with the Artists as a class it is necessary
that their special status he borne in mind. It is a class of people who are
indeed specially privileged either by nalural gift or by their own cultur-
ing of the art. This category of people cannot be equated with ordinary
Government servants for every purpose. [348F] B

r
The All India Radio and the Doordarshan in their normal func-
tioning would to a considerable extent depend upon qualitative and
efficient artists in order to make their programmes reach the desired
level. [348G]

The age-old practice of the job of the staff artists being con- c
tractual (whether short or long) is being given up and contractual emp-
loyment is being substituted by status based Government service. If
there are really efficient Artists of different classificat!!J11s who do not
want to be branded as Government servants, there is no immediate
justification for discontinuing and disturbing them in toto. [348H; 349A] D

Administrative scrutiny instead of judicial determination would
be more helpful. The Court therefore directed that in the appropriate
Ministry a High Power Committee be set up for examination of the
objections with reference to the terms of the scheme and the final deci-
sion be taken by the Government within six months. The views expres- E
sed in the .present decision be taken into account while dealing with the
objections for purpose of finalising the scheme. [349E; F-G]

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 13636/83 &
11760-66/84.
F
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia).

G. Ramaswamy, A.K. Ganguli, M.K. Ramamurthy, Kapil Sibal,
R.K. Garg, S. Srinivasan, D.K. Garg, Ms. A. Subhashini, B. Parth-
asarthi, C. V. Subba Rao, M.A. Krishnamurthy, V. Shekhar, H.S.
Mann, Ms. Chandan Krishnamurthy and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal for the G
appearing parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

RANGANATH MISRA, J. These are applications under Article
32 of the Constitution. Petitioner No. 1 in the first Writ Petition is the H
342 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

National Union of All India Radio Staff Artists; petitioner No. 2 is an
A
Announcer of the All India Radio and happens to be the General
Secretary of the Union; petitioners No. 3 to 8 are an instrumentalist, a
few news readers, announcers and the like. The petitioners in the
other writ petitions are seven in number consisting of six announcers
and a tanpura player connected with the All India Radio. According to
B the petitioners, the prevailing practice in All India Radio used to be to
offer appointments to various people as Staff Artists at the first
instance ordinarily for an initial term of three months and on comple-
tion of appropriate formalities appointments used to be offered for a
term of three years on contract basis at a minimum monthly fee. After
the expiry of the initial period of two years out of the three years
period of working which was considered as a period of probation
c contractual engagement up to the age of 55 years was being made
available. On selection, as alleged by the petitioners Staff Artists used
to be appointed to various positions like Announcer, News Readers,
Conductor, Music Compere, Instrumentalists, Producer and Script
Writer in the All India Radio or Producer, Production Assistant,
D Script Writer, Translator and General Assistant in Doordarshan.

In May, 1982 the respondent Union of India bifurcated the Staff
Artists into two categories like:
( 1) Staff Artists to be treated as artists; and
E (2) Staff Artists to be treated as Government Servants. ./

This decision was conveyed in a letter dated 3.5.82 and oppor-
tunity to exercise option to everyone by the end of December, 1983 for
final allocation to the two categories was provided. The letter
stipulated that those of the Staff Artists who did not opt were to
F continue under the existing terms and conditions. The first writ peti-
tion was filed on 12th December, 1983, challenging the Government's
order of 3.5.82 (Annextire 3) and for a direction to the respondents to )..
treat the Staff Artists at par with regular Government servants and fo
restrain the respondents from enforcing their direction for exercise of
option.

The other group of writ petitions was filed on 19th of March,
1984, the challenge therein was also to the same Government letter,
and petitioners asked for a direction to the respondents to treat the
Staff Artists as Government servants entitled to pensionary benefits .
•
H A return was made to the rule in the first writ petition by filing an
N.U.A.l.R. & ORS.v. U.0.1. & ANR. [MISRA, J.] 343

affidavit by the Under Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broad- A
casting. The respondents maintained that the Staff Artists did nG>t form
one homogeneous group and job requirements of the Staff Artists
were different from post to post. It was suggested that the Staff Artists
could be conveniently divided into two groups, namely, those who are
appearing or performing before the micro-.phone and the others who
are managing production and cbnnected jobs. It was also pointed out B
that all Staff Artists did not have the same terms as to remuneration. It
was suggested that the terms and conditions gm-;erning the Staff Artists
after their transformation into Government servants became different.
'In the interests of quality of broadcasting services, ft was claimed,
periodical assessments became indispensable and inevitable. The
affidavit further stated that the scheme which was enclosed to the
letter marked Annexure 3 contained a scheme which had been evolved
c
after due deliberations and there was no prejudice to the Artists if the
scheme was allowed to become operative.

On the 25th of April, 1988, with special reference to the first writ
petition and a connected civil appeal which is not before us at this D
stage, the Director-General of All India Radio sent the following com-
munication to the respondent's lawyer with a request that the same
may be placed before the Court. The letter stated:

"Under the directions of Hon'ble Court, the Government
have further examined the aspects of the scheme for artist E
""'. category to safeguard the rights of the Staff Artists from
any arbitrary factors in respect of discharge of duties under
their contract of service renewable after satisfactory per-
formance of their services. After careful examination, the
;' Government have now set-up three types of committees to
protect the rights of the staff artist from any arbitrary F
factors which are as under:

A. Since the renewal of contract is automatic if the records
are satisfactory, it would be best to leave it to the Station
Director or the Head of the Office concerned to review the
contract after verification of the records. G

B. In case, the records are not satisfactory, the question of
renewal of contract may be considered by a Review Com-
mittee/Representation Committee as under:

B(i) Review Committee (Both for AIR/Doordarshan) H
344 SUPREME COURT REPORTS I1990] 2 S.C.R.

(i) Station Director-Chairman
A
(ii) Two outside Assessors-Members who have
expertise in the field to which the Artists belong.

B(ii) Representation Committee

(Both for AIR/Doordarshan)

(i) Director General-Chairman
Addi. Director
General (Programme)

c (ii) Deputy Director-Member
General (Administration)

(iii) Representatives of-Member _>-·
the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
IJ
I am to request that a Government Counsel may please be
briefed accordingly to place the facts before the Honour-
able Court in the hearing today, i.e., dated 25th April, 88
at 2 P.M."

E On the basis of what transpired in Court after referring to the said . ,,f
letter, this Court on that date made the following order:

"In Civil Appeal No. 384 of 1977 Union of India v. M.A.
Chowdhary, AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1526 we have de-
clared that all the Staff Artists of All India Radio are hold-
F ing civil posts under !~~Government and they are gover-
ned by Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.

In 'view of the above decision it is no longer necessary
to make any further declaration in these petitions that the
Staff Artists are Government servants. The Circular dated
3rd May 1982 bearing No. 45011/26/80/B(A} issued by the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of
India proceeded on the assumption that the Staff l\rtists
who had entered the service of the All India Radio/Door- ...... '
darshan under the contracts were not Government servants
and that only those Staff Artists specifically mentioned in
!fl that Circular could become and be treated as Government
N.U.A.l.R. & ORS.v. U.0.1. & ANR. [MISRA, J.] 345

Servants provided they satisfied the conditions mentioned A
~.
therein. In view of the decision referred to above it has now
< become necessary for the Government to review the entire
question covered by the Circular dated 3rd May, 1982. We,
therefore, direct the Government of India to review the
entire situation and to prepare a fresh scheme in accor-
B
dance with law having regard to the nature of duties
performed by each categ'0ry of Staff Artists. While prepar-

r
ing such a scheme the Government may also keep in view
the cases of Staff Artists who have already exercised their
option as provided by the circular dated 3rd May, 1982.
Such scheme shall be prepared on or before 31. 7 .1988.
After the scheme is prepared a copy of it shall be made c
available to all the parties to this case. The parties
aggrieved may file objections before this Court within
August 15, 1988.

This case shall come up for directions on 5th Septem-
ber, 1988." D

In terms of the direction given on the 25th of April, 1988, a draft
scheme framed by the Government has been produced before the
Court along with an accompanying affidavit. Paragraph 2 of the said
scheme states:

"In pursuance of the above mentioned orders, those Staff
Artists who opted for becoming 'G,,v<>rnment Servants'
and were found fit by duly constituted Screening Commit-
tee were treated as Government Servants with effect from
6.3.1982. Such Staff Artists were made entitled to the same
pensionary benefits as are applicable to Government F
Servants. They were, however, not entitled to any special
benefits available to them as Staff Artists. Likewise, Staff
Artists in the 'Artists' category who opted for being treated
as 'Artists' and come over to the new terms and conditions
were treated as 'Artists' with effect from 6.3.1982."
G
Paragraph 3 provides:

"The following categories of Staff Artists/Artists in All
India Radio/Doordarshan are, however, still to be treated
as Government Servants:
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

(i) Staff Artists who opted for being declared as
'Government Servants' but were not found fit by the
Screening Committee;

(ii) Staff Artists who opted for being treated as
'Artists' category and were declared as 'Artists' after
.B~ screening by the Screening Committe@;

(iii) Staff Artists who opted for being treated as
'Artists' but were not found fit by the Screening Committee
for beingtreated as 'Artists' and
'i
~

(iv) Staff Artists who did not opt for being treated as
c 'Government Servants' or for being treated as 'Artists'.

The scheme further indicates:

"4. The Government has reconsidered the entire Scheme
b in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
delivered on 25.4.1988 in Writ Petitions Nos. 13636 of 1983
and 11760-66 of 1984 in National Union of All India Radio
and Others .v. Union of India. In partial modification of this
Ministry's letter No. 45001/26/80-B(A) dated 3.5.1982 and
No. 45011/26/80-B(A) dated 26.8. 1983, it has been decided
as under:- ../

• (i) All Staff Artists/Artists working in All India
Radio and Doordarshan (except foreign nationals) will be
deemed as Government Servants holding civil posts on pre-
scribed Central Government scales of pay. 11

(ii) All such Staff Artists/Artists working in All India
Radio and Doordarshan will be entitled to pensionary and J.
other benefits on the same terms and conditions as are
applicable to other Government Servants holding civil
posts. They will be governed by all rules and regulations
0 and general instructions issued by Government from time
to time like FR and SR, GFR, CCS (CCA) Rules, CCS
(Conduct) Rules and Pension Rules etc. etc. All facilities/
benefits available to regull(r Central Government emp-
loyees will be automatically applicable to them also on the
. same terms and conditions as are applicable to regular
iij Central Government servants. However, any special bene-
L.
N.U.A.I.R. & ORS.v. U.0.1. & ANR. {MISRA, J.] 347

fit/concession available to such Staff Artists/Artists'. of
A
AIR and Doordarshan, in so far these are not in accor-
dance with rules and regulations and general instructions
applicable to Central Government servants, will be with·
drawn from the date of issue of these orders.

(iii) The date of retirement on superannuation in B
respect of such Staff Artists/Artists of All India Radio and
Doordarshan deemed as Government Servants will be the
r same as applicable to holders of civil posts in Central
Government.
~

(iv) The contribution of such Staff Artists.'Artists
working in AIR and Doordarshan made to Contributory c
Provident Fund (CPF) along with interest thereon will be
transferred to their General Provident Fund (GPF)."
-)._
"5. The Staff Artists/Artists working in AIR and Door-
darshan deemed as Government Servants will continue to D
be in their existing categories and grades with regular pay
scales. The future recruitment to each grade will be made
according to the Recruitment Rules as per procedures pre-
scribed for recruitment to different posts."

\.._ "6. The posts held by the Staff Artists/Artists working in E
All India Radio and Doordarshan will stand converted into
civil posts from the date of issue of these orders."

The.order made by this Court on 25th of April, 1988, was not a final
:!- judgment and this Court had directed the Union of India to review the
entire situation and to prepare a fresh scheme in accordance with li.w F

- having regard to the nature of duties performed by each of the
;._ categories of Staff Artists. Obviously, the intention of the Court while
making the order dated 25th April, 1988, was to have the scheme
placed before the Court for consideration. Though the scheme has
been styled as a draft scheme, its contents indicate that it has been
implemented. The main objection of the petitioners against the pre- G
sent scheme is the stipulation therein that the Staff Artists will be
taken as Government servants from the date of the order. According
-r to them, the Allahabad High Court had in its decision dated 12th of
July, 1974, given a declaration <hat all the Staff Artists were Govern-
ment servants and the said decision was affirmed by this Court in a
judgment dated May 7, 1987, reported in 1987 3 SCR 424 Union of H
348 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R.

India v. M.A. Chowdhary. It is the contention of the petitioners that
A the benefit of conversion or declaration should be effective from
12.7.1974 and those who were in employment then as Staff Artists
should be considered as Government from this date and others who
joined after 12.7.74 should be conferred the status of Government
servants from the date of joining. There is also a claim by the peti-
B tioners to pension for those who have retired after 12. 7.1974 and prior
to the present scheme. It is the further contention of the petitioners
that while formulating the present scheme the Court's direction of 25th
of April, 1988, has.riot been strictly kept in view. Reliance has been
placed on this Court's order dated 3rd April, 1984, where it was indi-
cated that failure of Staff Artists to exercise the option should not
prejudice their right in any manner and either a fresh opportunity to
c exercise the option should be given or even in the absence of option
the same benefits should be given. Some of the objections which have
been raised and are noticed above seem to be germane and require
consideration. This Court's order of 25th April, 198~, requiring a
fresh scheme to be formulated obviously meant that the exercise of
D option in terms of the order dated 3rd May, 1982, was not taken to be
'the final date for exercise of option. Opportunity to exercise fresh
option should have been given or perhaps the new scheme could have
accepted the position that unless one wanted to be not absorbed he
should have been deemed to be accepting absorption. As in the
changed setting the class of Staff Artists was really intended to be done
E away with in due course, such a deeming base should have been
accepted for convenient implementation.

One class of Staff Artists engaged under contracts wants such
status to continue. Otherwise stated, they do not want the contractual
base to be changed into employment. 'I
F
While dealing with the Artists as a class it is necessary that their
special status be borne in mind. It is a class of people who are indeed J.
specially privileged either by natural gift or by their own culturing of
the art. This category of people cannot be equated with ordinary
Government servants for every purpose. The All India Radio and the
G Doordarshan ii) their normal functioning would to a considerable
extent depend upon qualitative and efficient artists in order to make
their programmes reach the desired level. The scheme necessarily con-
templates a transitional period. The age-old practice of the job of the
Staff Artists being contractual (whether short or long) is being given
up and contractual employment is being substituted by status-based
1-l. Gov~I1lment service. If there are really efficient Artists of different
N.U.A.l.R. & ORS.v. U.0.1. & ANR. [MISRA, J.J 349

classifications who do not want to be branded as Government servants, A
there is no immediate justification for discontinuing and disturbing
them in toto. The transitional period could be elongated to accommo-
date the appropriate category of Artists not willing to be absorbed as
Government servants. ·

Of late, Government themselves are having a re-look at the B
matter. It is their stipulation that All India Radio and Doordarshan
should be made into autonomous corporations and for that purpose
legislation is in the process. What is in contemplation is contrary to
what is in the scheme. This means that the matter is still in a fluid
stage. It is, therefore, appropriate that either a deeming position
should have been accepted in the scheme as indicated above or a fresh c
opportunity for exercise of option should have been provided. Again,
the demand of the above group of artists should have also been
considered.
The question of deeming the employees as Government servants
from the date of the Allahabad High Court's judgment is another issue D
which requires examination. Connected with it would be the question
of entitlement to pension. We are of the view that these are aspects
which should first be initially examined by a Committee to be set UJ' by
the Government and after a definite view is taken it would be open to
the petitioners to approach the appropriate Court to redress the
remaining greivances, if any. The matter is such that administrative E
scrutiny instead of judicial determination would be more helpful. We,
therefore, refrain from expressing any final view. We reiterate that the
order dated 25th of April, 1988, intended a draft scheme to be drawn
up for consideration of the Court. The scheme as produced in the
Court along with the accompanying affidavit has also been described
f as a draft scheme. The objections raised by the petitioners to the said F

' scheme are available on the record:We direct that in the appropriate
Ministry a High Power Committee be set up for examination of the
objections with reference to the terms of the scheme and the final
decision be taken by the Government within six months. The views
expressed in the present decision be taken into account while dealing
with the objections for purposes of finalising the scheme. Liberty is G
given to the aggrieved parties when final decision is taken by Govern-
ment to move the Court.

These writ petitions are disposed of with these directions. No
costs.
H
Y. Lal Petition disposed of.