IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22508 of 2007(D) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. V.UTHAMAN, FINANCE MANAGER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 2. S.D.PRASANNAKUMARAN NAIR, ASST.ENGINEER, TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 3. A.NAZIMUDIN, DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (MECHANICAL), TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 4. S.RAJAN, SECTION OFFICER, TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 5. M.BALAKRISHNAN, ASST.ENGINEER, (SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT), TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 6. B.ARUMUGHAN PILLAI, ASST.ENGINEER (INDUSTRIES), TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 7. G.RAMESH MOHAN, ASST.PLANT MANAGER, TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 8. A.CONSON GOMEZ, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 9. N.J.MOHANACHANDRAN, ASST.MANAGER (LAB) TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. WP(C).No. 22508 of 2007(D) ------------------------------------- 10. K.K.SASEENDRAN, ASST.MANAGER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 11. A.K.MADHUSOODANAN, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 12. VARGHESE VARGHESE, ASST.ENGINEER (DRAWING), TRAVANCORE TITANUIUM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 13. P.RANGAN ASARI, ASST.ENGINEER (CIVIL), TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 14. A.SASIKUMARAN PILLAI, SECTION OFFICER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 15. V.A.KURIAN, (CHEMIST), TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 16. P.G.RAJMOHAN, CHEMIST, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 17. ISSAC PHILIP, CHIEF PRODUCTION MANAGER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 18. D.KARTHIKEYAN, ASST.ENGINEER (MECH) TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 19. J.RAJENDRAN, MANAGER, (SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT), TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 20. G.PRABHAKARAN PILLAI, FINANCE CONTROLLER, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. WP(C).No. 22508 of 2007(D) ---------------------------------------- 21. V.L.JOSE, MANAGER (TECHNICAL), TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 22. P.E.VELAPPAN, FOREMAN, TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. 23. G.SATHEESH BABU, ASST.ENGINEER (MECH), TRAVANCORE TITANIUIM PRODUCTS LTD., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNAMTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM SRI.JIJI THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., KOCHUVELI, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD. KOCHUVELI, TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.K.ANAND SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.11.2010 , ALONG WITH WPC NO. 3585 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK WP(C).No. 22508 of 2007(D) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX ---------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ EXT.P1. COPY OF ORDER DATED 5.7.2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF MINUTES OF THE 344TH MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFTRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD. EXT.P3. COPY OF MEMO DATED 13TH JUNE 2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. COPY OF ORDER DATED 5.9.2002 OF 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P5. COPY OF THE NOTES SHOWING THE FINANCIAL POSITION, CONSIDERED IN THE BUDGET PROPOSAL 2007-2008. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ ANNEXURE R1(A). COPY OF THE STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE TO MANAGERIAL PERSONNEL. ANNEXURE R1(B). COPY OF MD'S ORDER NO.23/07 DATED 5.7.07. ANNEXURE R1(C). COPY OF BOARD MINUTES DATED 25.6.07. ANNEXURE R1(D). COPY OF MD'S ORDER NO.24/07 DATED 7.7.07. ANNEXURE R1(E). COPY OF THE REVISED SGRENGTH OFMANAGERIAL PERSONNEL AS APPROVED BY THE BOARD. / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). Nos.22508/2007-D, 15922/2008-U, 35223/2008-R & 3585/2009-B ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 24th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T All these writ petitions concern a common question regarding the retirement age of managerial staff of the Travancore Titanium Products Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram. 2. These writ petitions have been filed by the service organisations as well as individuals aggrieved by the fixing of retirement age at 58 years. 3. The case of the petitioners is that the age of superannuation at the time of entry in service of all these personnel was 60 years and it was remaining as such. As far as the workers category is concerned, it was 58 years and with regard to other staff members it was 60 years. 4. Heard Shri N.Nandakumara Menon and Shri.Kurian George Kannanthanam learned Senior Counsel and learned counsel Shri Pirappancode V.S.Sudheer appearing for the petitioners and, Shri K.Anand learned counsel and Smt.N.Sudha Devi learned Government Pleader for respondents. 5. The decision of the Board of Directors is reflected in Ext.P8 Minutes produced in W.P.(C). No.15922/2008. It is contended that the reasons stated in support of the decision are clearly wrong and have no nexus with the ground realities. Mainly, the reason shown by the W.P.(C). Nos.22508/2007, 15922/2008, 35223/2008 & 3585/2009 -:2:- Management for recommending the bringing down of the retirement age to 58 years is the poor financial condition of the Company. It is pointed out that in similar circumstances, the management attempted to bring down the retirement age of staff members which was under challenge before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) who by Ext.P10 order interfered with the same. It is argued that mainly the reason stated therein also was the financial position of the Company. It is therefore, submitted that the said reason is clearly taken as the ruse and without any legal support and, therefore, cannot be sustained. It is further pointed out that even if it is a policy decision of the Management, the policy has to be a reasonable one and cannot be an arbitrary one. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that even after the introduction of the policy, attempts have been made to extend the service of certain persons by adopting a pick and choose policy and it is also alleged that after allowing persons to retire at the age of 58, indiscriminatory appointments have been made that too by resorting to backdoor method and, instances have been pointed out by filing affidavits in these cases. The learned counsel for the Management submitted that these allegations are not correct and it was only a policy W.P.(C). Nos.22508/2007, 15922/2008, 35223/2008 & 3585/2009 -:3:- decision taken by the Management to fix the age of retirement at 58 years. The issues will have to be addressed after considering various aspects pointed out by both sides, and since it is a public sector undertaking, it is only proper that the Government takes a decision after hearing all the parties. Ext.P11 produced in W.P.(C). No.3585/2009 is one of the representations filed before the Government by the Association. The petitioners in the other writ petitions may collectively or individually file appropriate representations before the Government and the Government will take a decision in the matter after hearing the representatives of the Association and the Management within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representations. It is made clear that I have not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. The petitioners will be free to file fresh representations along with a copy of this Judgment within three weeks from today. The writ petition are disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms