K Befoxe thra High court o£ Judicatur " ‘ w.P,No. ,2 /2ou1. e at Bila$ggr (€2'g‘arh). z;4;.fm{,. w5; é v:- mm. W 0£ ggy india wri - taireCtio £or a writ ordeg. o£ mandamus. certora ’. ‘ i & i :- Janwadi Iviazaoor Ekta the Kenara. Provisions a Trade o£ irade Union g ggtitioner Union Mo. Registered Secretary 2&29 mt‘ ( under 1926. Jagnarayan hagng thr0ugh Chewdhugy re its stration Genarai of£iCe IJ.0. 3hilai p Kwg ‘ " ' a x at Tahsil Baikunthnaga‘r anti mstt Camp Durg.( II. C‘garh) . ‘é’x ‘1 x . vamvs. through the Seczétary: Responaents :—1. gnion mushy House. oi Haw xmiiaa ot‘ Delhi. iron 5; steel. Parliament. 3: \‘y Constructibrf'htd / 2.Hinausthan (A Government 3teel 01E works India vndertaking) . J/Phrough its Chai Shakespeare rman— cum- Sarani Managing (8th ‘f; . ._.-v'§£$ .. iw moor.) Director. a 3alcutta 1. -. 700071. Constxuctien L ta f ‘1‘ Lainausthan $teel Bhilai) warks Through its General‘ " ‘1‘ “‘9’ Manager; (Local Unit Bhilaia at P.0.Bhilai Dd.stt.Durg. XI-HC-22 ‘L {a Advecate for the petitioxmrs 5569/2000, 5571/2000, 51; 205,12001, 468f’2001, 184 1542/ 2002. MI. PP, Nos.22<3;2002, 1131;2002, '7 M1: Thakur Vijae aaim, cm writ pgti'éens. Mr. V.V,S. Munhv. Sr with _, Ativoc‘ate .115’e1 for the petitieners in WP. 44/2002 8L 1354} 2002. Sing, for réspmldsnt No. 1 in all 1316 Counsei for raspomiam No.2 81, 3 3'11 WP, NQSAE‘il/‘QOOQ, 744]2()02 8r, 1379/2002 ‘allci in 113st of Th6 RS. Koshv, Advocats wigl Mr‘ Vinod Deshmukh, colulsd for m$pondent NC;.2 an 3. As all th€se pmitions ralata t0 those. ampioye€$ wha wok the voiuman‘ retimnmnt under aforemexltioned patitions Mr. the. Voiuntaw Retirem‘gn't Schémia miroduceci by msponcient N032. (E3 3 virie. HG cmulm‘ NQV GM (9&A) j ESTI‘; 16; 88 dated Circuiar No. 10.11‘1§88. l—IO PER ;’RR]531/M—7221 dated 18th] 19th 11.1993. 8:; HO Cimular N0. PERfRR/531 dated 28619735, which was €xt€nd€d from {ime to iime 3:11pm vear 2000, reiief pEtiu'ons am coverai by therefore, these eefitione ax being disposed of by this comma}: Oi‘der. ' claimed bv the petitionerS 1'11 Lhes€ ‘ e pomts' raised in WP. No.2i2ODJ_,. mnsel fer the netitiener in WP. Shri {1R Sahu, in W.P‘ NQ$.30811}30{§O. 43G5IZ’OUO. 2001; 54/ 2001, 55j2x361, 102/2001, ff'20G1, 12§1!2@0‘2, 1379§2082 3e 1, Assistant Solicitor General of Iadia 28.4.2005 Mr. BE. (3110311, cc No.2;2001. Mr, i1 Shashidharai XI—HC—22 EW,W,W 3mm mmwmaw At the. outget it may be mentioned. that re$pond€nt N02 8a 3 hava not denied the admissibiHty of the bene ts to the peijtioners, bui thgir cas€ if; that respondsnts concm‘n 1S running in iess and ‘« ‘ ch16. to‘ Iinanciai crunch they introduced voluntaly xetirsmem Schmne for reducing the wcrkmsn fowe .ija. order i0 teduC€ ihe fmancial burden. In the return of respondent No.12 QIL‘L’E it has beerl mentioned that respoxldents have never denied benefite to its empioyeee but because of paucity of fmlds the beneflts of eaian and wages cannot be given in fuil extent. The first claim made by the petitieners is thatthey‘ ale entitled for the axrears of S‘h Pay Commission from 1,11996 to 81.12J’1‘997V Learned com sel for the petitioners.’ ’Submits that empleyeee of respendent No 2 x”; 3 were given benefits of 4th Pay Comission axxd thereafter, 3m Pay, Commissien was given to 2U} Public Undertakings wef. 1V1,I1996 and in this C(mneci’jon a circular elated 20.11998 {Annexure P—i) was issued. Since the employees of respondent No.2 8a 3 fall unc‘ier the Central Deafness Allewance (C.D.A.), they are also eh'gible for 5m Pay Commiesion from 1.1.1996, but the em pieyees of Bhiiai Unit Working under {eegondent No.3 have been allowed the said benetits only from '1, 1. 1998 and have been deprived of the said benefxts for the. petiofi 1 t from 1,1.1996 to 31.121997. Mr. Koeh‘y, counsel f‘)r respondent No.2 at, 3 Submits that .; except arrears for this perio Le. from 1.1.19go to 1.12.199? all , t the dues have been paid to tle petitionere. / } /. K XI—HC—22 Wm. We &\§'\ .v ..... W '200 n. H... o . mmmw WW§wW :3 J - é:aT%traTl%sT ' in this conngction, if we‘ 109k into the Anmixuye P‘Q dated 10.11.1988, at the time of mtroduction of voluntary retjmment Echalm th¢ cmployacs 0f rESpGudttnt N02 82:' 3 Wisp: informi‘d that they will be. paid all the benwtflts aS ummionad in the circular inciudmg the. CPF, Earned LeaWe encaé‘shmam as per mics of ihe Company, gratuity, salary for dge nctice period and TX. equivalent to actual fare of the dass by RaB to which the employéss. is entitled for §elf and family 131‘0C66ding to recorded hams town alid reimburSEmsm of actual expen ‘iturc incurmd for Kalisporfation of 9 } pm‘sonal effact as per’T.A. Rule . Since the respondent co pany is running in loss that iS why the Genfral Government came forware‘; for financial aseis‘cance i0 the responcients-Compwy and ae informed by Mr. Murthy that 1'11 the met instailce Rs.79.§9 cro s non‘pian ioan wag Sammiened by me Central Govemment in the ear 1999—2000 t0 meet the liabiHty 0f statumi'y clues granted in 1 9 as part of campreheneive levival package, thereafter, a non—p} ban of Rs.89.44 erores grained i1} the vear 2001-02 to meet e h‘ability of etatutory dues :0 separated employees and sun ariy, a nonnpian loan of Re.61.11 crores gmlned in the year 2(‘02—03 for payment of Lines to the emelevees of respondent fSCL Accoréingly, the Central Government has granted e0 much mancia} assistance to the .. Iespondeni-Company in order to make the payment of separateei emyloyees as comprehensiee viva} package and the petitioners sought voluntmy‘retirement, a; per respondent. company’s echeme, i XI—HC-22 mm mm W "iherefom, respondent No.2 & 3 should mat ignom the sacrifice made by the petitionersby seeking voluntaiy retirement. Thus, in abovc factS thE petitionérs m5 Commission and also the. ben€f1t 1 of arreais for the period fmm 1.1.1996 to 81.12. 1997 as ciaimed by the petitioners, as the {mt}. ' néxs are a ciass sepax‘éie because § they have took the vollm refinement and being retired employees they required so e financial assistemce fer their settlement after their retir . The empioyees, who are stiil marking, are getting their sai ries but the retired emp’ioyees are whoily (iepenciant on the r beeefits w]:1atever they xeceivedV Particularly when Lrcsponden No.2 8;. 3 have beeli i‘eiaclereci fmanciai aseistance by the tr& Government? they are under obligation- to pay the ane s of 5th Pay Commission to the employees who took the volu taiy retiremem as per the scheme introduced by the respondent my opinion, in Vi€w of all €ntit1eci for the. baneiit of 5th 0.2 85 3‘ As such, it is directed that ”’1 respondent No.2 85 3 shall pay the arrears of 5‘11 Pay Commission to the petiiionere for the period 1. 1. 1996 to 31. 1'2. 1§97, as ciairned by the petitioners. Now, commg to the sec and point raised by the couiieei for the petitioners regarding DAV, which was 380/5 up to 316.2000 and ultimately increased to 4 1% from 1.7.2000, as mentioneci in " {Eiause (b) of Paragraph No.4 of the petition. Counsel for the petitioners’ contention is that till 30.6.20GC) the petitioners were paid 22% DA only, whereas they were entitied. for the increased DA. ' As against this Mr. Koshv submits that as per circular of dew) [no i W E y e m e ‘ "\ n XI-HC—22 frf-N‘ {a .u ”ununuonnnN. nu. . u XI-HC-ZZ ma mm WW they are reiSJEd emphayeesj therefore, herein are a class $epax‘ate, resycmdent No.2 3a 3 even after gettieg fmémeial assistance from the Central Government, they are net paying to these employeee, therefore, they shouid pay the DA moreased from time to time. by the Central Government t3 the petitioners till date of their remement. A$ far aS the {Joint Wit'n regmtl {o the increase 9f House Relit Allawanct is concsnwd, th€ But when respondent Company has been. paucity of funds. directed to pay the increaeexi DA, as such the petitioners are also entitlek for incmaseki HRA. No.2 & 3 should pav ihE in miss. The, othvst‘ point rai$cd is‘ that in same cases ihe rahrement 1'11 the month a} $5rviccs till June, 2-000, bu is. from 1.9.1999 rm thcir paid to them, In thje reS hae alreadv been madeanc‘t that payment has aheady ‘As far as Ether ejla the petitioners for transp aliowemce alongwith their d Lieclared homeLtown & sett .t' -/~ ‘§' r6191}? of responclentNOQ 61x 3 iS that increased HRA couid not. be paid to the employees on account of Therefore. it is held fhat reepomieilt creased HRA to the petitioners as pef by learned counsel for the petitionere petitigners have opt’ed for Voluntary ‘August 1999 but they centinueci £11 t the saimv fer this; intervening peliod actuai date of remmem has not been ct, Mr, Koshy submits that payment the petirioners? counsei also concedes received. n es it. actual allowance incurred bx? ion of their iuggagg, scgztrawgmg pendent family members to reach their ent ailewmlce are concerneé, in this ._"‘,‘ b p wr o l m ( c t XI—HC-22 3am, Wm,W Wm Viaglm... V . " Ha 200 mam WW WW mmmw WW§wW $Wm connéction Mr. Keshy subinim that A22count$ Department ha$ iakcn a1} objection that emphv‘ew are c1aimixig tramsportatima of th€ir luggagE, SCif travclling Expenses 6L- r$§ittl€imcnt allowanc¢ 0n fcrged bills wizhout Settling at their deck d hams town and awn somté of the empiOyees wm‘e retainmg the company’s (11.15313em. Mr. Shashidharan. counsel for the petitioners‘Ergued that the emnloveas are entitkd fer settlement aBowaxce evaa if thsv dicid€ to Settlt’, at 861116 cathar piact than thc‘ dixiartd homE fawn. Having healti learned counsc} for m6 parties and having :egard to me facts in case, this is the normal yractice that when an employee retires he is entitied far tralmportation chargw, iravamng charges for himself and his (16 ancient family members to reach his declared home tcrwn, therefore, respondent No.2 653 are directed t0 gaay the petitieners travelling owance for the employee himself alcng with dependent membee 0f his family; rmxxsportation of house holds and settling a iowance as per actual expenses maimed in fhat respect by the emeloyees upto the ement admissible under the rules. It is made Clear that these aliewauces K111 be admissible to the petitioners ~ after satisfying the resyondents about incm‘fmg of those expenses anti in this connection before making pav ent respomients can ask for tickets of the travelling and else ihe eeeipt of transporiau'on. They W111 ‘3 also be entitled to have their satisfaction that the employee has. actualiv setried at ‘rhe deciared ometown. As far as the claim reg ling medical facxhfy is concenied, a » 1 XI-HC-22 HW,W,W Wm VJ? Hi 200 u... ”n...” mm WW mmw _, g; K WWW‘§WW aawm given to them a3 par 4th Pay Commission, whemas it ought to have been given as per 5th Pa; Cammi5$i0n in this respect havmg considereci the point raiSE£1 by hamlet“; couneei for the petitioners; i am of the. opinion that it is appmpriate to dimcx the reSpondems that in case any empioyee incurred any medicai t“; expenses admissible to him before the retirement 9e per m3dical rules and glen thev are enfitled fer thé {iiiference on account 0f the rulee of pay :exr'isicn 1’11 pureuance of 5th Pay Commission 011 satisfying by the concerned employee about the incun‘ing of that expenses difference between 4th Pay (.mnmieeion 355$ Pay Commiseion, if axly} be paid to the petitioner . As far the Chaim of t‘he petiiioners regai‘fhng Leave travel conceeeion (LTCj is concenled: as the respomien‘te comggany ie already running in loss and Central Government has also from time to time restricted the L C entitiement of the empioyees, 1 am of the opinion that 100' g to the financial crunch of the respondent Comyany it is n t appropriate to giant thie reh'ef to the petitioners, moreover: they ave already been mined and also in View of The fact that in the se of DA inspite the fact that DA has been fmzen the petitionem 1ave been granted increased LIA. ‘ny thie order. Hence. this: cieim cannot be allowed. AS far as the last ol' ' of the petitioners regarding benefit of additional garivilege of Earnd Leave (EL) and Half Pay Leave has been curtajied is coneemed, counsel for the 'gxetitioneie argued that and hail pay ’leave) which Nee ll; the benefit of earned lea W XI-HC-22 33W, m,W W WWwggkx . . Hi 200 m ....... . ..................... Wmmw r49- WW§WW ’ _ %3?%W311%$ ampioyees were oii‘ered voluntary retirement echeme has been curtailed' bv Circular Armexure 13—4 aateci 28.8.2000 with retrospective eifect‘ Again in my Opinicm, curtailmcnt of this ‘ beneflt with retrospective effect cannot be coneidered to be. vah'd. In the 1113f. plaee the petitioners took the voluntary tetirement in. pursuance of the scheme introduced by the respomiént company for reduction ’of the workmen force mad on the other harm curtailment of the benefit of earned leave aged half pay leave with retroepective effect Vide Circular Anneme P—2 dated 28.8.2000 by the respondent Company 13; contrary to the spirit of circular Annexure P—Q. Therefore, in my opinion the respomients are got entitleti to curtail the :benefr. of earned leave 35 haif pay leave tiil 27.8.2000, however, that can he made effective in the cases Where the retirement has been e§ccted wet. 28.8.2000. According1y, ieepoudents are dimmed to give benefit of encashment of Emed Leave r35 Half Pay Leave tc the petitioner ae per ruies up to 27.8.2000 as per the prevailing scheme up to that clate. MI. Shashidharan; counsel for the petitionere submits that a33art from these ctaims 1‘31 eome cages respondents are charging more license fee of the quarters. which are ’provided to the employeee by the respondeot No2 65 3 in comparison to the outsiders to whom the company has aiso providecl the quartere He further submits that 1'11 some of the caee some empioyeee incurred expenses in respect of special diseasee, which were not to tie recovered from the employeee concemed, but the Same have been recovered from the dues pavable to the emelovees. (@ti‘et) ‘ ‘ XI—HC-22 WW WW WW§WW 5e _ %ai%nan%$r R0$hanf — L As far as filese points 1iberty to avail the separate re} '111 thE 1‘6Su1t, for the f0 directed to make the. ‘paymm aforesaid directions given by later than six months from mday, as mogt of the Rfiitionem toek ' / their retirement .5 to 6 years rem-a1 dues. Certified capy as per ru posed of in terme of the abeve order. are cancerned, the petitioners are at nedy as aiimissible umier fhe law. regeing reasone, the respondente are us {o the petitioners in iight of the ne (,ourt 3% ed11y m poeeible but mot ‘ back aiQ. they are waitin far their g Sdl- L.C.BHADOO Judge Writ Petitions Stand dis» V ts. ‘/ /