THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.8060/2003 & 16/2004 COMMON ORDER: The subject-matter of these two writ petitions is common. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. The petitioners were the employees of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust. The Port Trust wanted to prune its work force, and accordingly introduced the voluntary retirement scheme. That was in force, almost for a decade, between 1991 and 2001. All the petitioners submitted applications and they were permitted to retire on voluntary basis, on various dates. The Government of India, Ministry of Surface Transport issued proceedings dated 29-08-1991, stipulating the guidelines for voluntary retirement. One of the benefits, which was offered to the employees, who go on voluntary retirement, is that the notice pay, whether for one month or three months, shall be payable depending on the category. The petitioners availed the benefit and retired. They were extended all the benefits, but not the notice pay. They claim the relief in the form of direction to the respondents to extend the notice pay, as provided for, under the scheme. The respondents filed counter-affidavit, opposing the plea. It is stated that the notice pay is payable only when the request of the employees for voluntary retirement is accepted, before expiry of the notice period, and not when the employee is continued in service, for the period, exceeding the time of issuance of notice, after his application is submitted. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. There is no denial of the fact that the scheme comprised of an offer, to extend the notice pay also. The applications submitted by the petitioners were not accepted, at once. While the applications of petitioners 1 and 10 in W.P.No.8060 of 2003 and petitioner Nos.1, 6 and 7 in W.P.No.16 of 2004 were accepted, before the expiry of the notice pay, the request made by the rest of the petitioners were accepted after expiry of such period. In other words, substantial number of petitioners continued in service, beyond three months, after their applications were submitted. The respondents construed that the need to extend the notice pay would arise, only when the employee retired, before expiry of the notice period. This very question fell for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.2342 of 2003 and batch. Through a common judgment dated 31-10-2007, this Court held that the employees who retired on voluntary basis would be eligible to be paid the notice pay, if only they have retired from service, before expiry of the three months, from the date of submission of applications. Following the same, the writ petitions are partly allowed, directing that the petitioners 1 and 10 in W.P.No.8060 of 2003 and petitioner Nos.1, 6 and 7 in W.P.No.16 of 2004, shall be entitled to be paid the notice pay, for the corresponding period; and holding that the rest of the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. Necessary calculation in this regard shall be made and amount shall be paid within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.16-12-2010. KO