Regularising parcel porters’ job: HC rejects Centre’s appeal

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court upheld a tribunal order directing the Centre to absolve a group of porters (coolie) who carry Railway parcels at the Malda Railway Station demanding their services be regularised and their pending wages from 2011 be cleared.

The bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee was moved by the Union of India challenging the Tribunal order in favour of the parcel porters (respondents). Respondents are porters who initially earned livelihood by carrying passenger luggage at the Malda Town Railway Station. They did so by paying licence fees to Railways. After years, the Railway began utilising them for loading, unloading and transporting Railway parcels and for other departmental duties.

Thus, Railways stopped renewing their licences as porters and instead issued identity cards, designating them as parcel porters. They were paid wages on the basis of attendance recorded in a register. The respondents alleged when they requested regularisation of their services as parcel porters, Railways introduced a subsidy system to handle parcel-related work at various stations and paid a lump sum amount for it “to avoid the responsibility of absolving the respondents”. Neither were their services regularised nor were they paid monthly wages since 2011. Services of parcel porters at other stations within the same Malda Division were allegedly regularised. Centre’s counsel argued that respondents were originally licensed porters carrying passengers’ luggage and earned money from the passengers. Many of them inherited their licences from their predecessors. Further, the officer who issued them identity cards was not authorised for doing so. Their signatures on the attendance register were forged. They didn’t surrender their porter licences to work as parcel porters. This means they are still licensed porters.

The respondent’s counsel said had they been still working as licensed porters they would have been required to pay the license fee but Railways could not produce any receipts. Further, documents showed that Railways made payments to them, suggesting that they worked as parcel porters.

Among other observations, court observed Railways acknowledged that respondents were working as parcel porters at Malda Station and were getting paid. They were working under the direct supervision of a Railway official. Hence, they were entitled to get benefits of a Railways order on August 24, 2000.