TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Constitution - the employees, who were superannuated or voluntarily retired prior to 01.04.2003 from Appellant Corporation, are not entitled to notional wage revision as directed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, and the High Court - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Civil Appeal No. 10697 of 2014, 10698 of 2014, 10699 of 2014, 10700 of 2014, 10701 of 2014, 10702 of 2014, 10703 of 2014, 10704 of 2014 And 10705 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 3-12-2014 - Vikramajit Sen And Prafulla C. Pant, JJ. For Appellant: Gaurab Banerjee, Sr. Adv., T.G. Narayanan Nair and K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Advs. For Respondents: P.D. Meghe, Satyajit A. Desai, Anagha S. Desai and S. Kumar, Advs. JUDGMENT Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals, by way of special leave petitions, are directed against judgment and order dated 30.3.2012, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, whereby writ petitions, challenging order dated 4.8.2010 delivered by Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay, in Transferred Application Nos. 2001 of 2009, 2002 of 2009 and 2004 to 2035 of 2009, were disposed of. In said order the Tribunal has extended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia that by way of financial restructuring, it would waive the interest, penal interest and outstanding loan of ₹ 30.80 crores, and the same would be converted into equity. Similarly, non-plan loan of ₹ 15 crores was agreed to be converted into equity, thereby raising the paid-up capital of the Corporation from ₹ 73.75 crores to ₹ 119.55 crores. The Communication of the Government of India made it clear that the wage revision would be effective from 1.4.2003 but shall be implemented with effect from 1.4.2006. It was also provided that the arrears of the year 2005-06 be paid to the employees subject to achieving gross profit of ₹ 15.64 crores in said year. It was also stipulated that the Government would review physical and financial performance of the Appellant-Corporation, and may allow permitting it to pay arrears for the years 2003-04 and 2004-05 in the year 2007-08. The Ministry of Mines, Government of India, vide its letter dated 17.8.2006, instructed the Appellant-Corporation to take action in pursuance to the approval in terms of letter dated 8.8.2006. Consequently, the Corporation issued its Office Order dated 25.8.2006, stating therein that ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court by filing Writ Petition Nos. 3116 of 2001, 3117 of 2011, 3118 of 2011, 3241 of 2011, 3253 of 2011, 3256 of 2011, 3276 of 2011, 3278 of 2011 and 3281 of 2011, which were dismissed by a common judgment challenged before us. 8. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted before us that after the Appellant, a public sector undertaking of Government of India, started incurring losses every year from 1992, the Government of India constituted a High Power Committee in the year 1995 to suggest various measures in order to improve financial condition of the Corporation. A Review Committee for monitoring financial condition of the Corporation recommended drastic measures, including cutting down size of manpower by floating Voluntary Retirement Scheme. Some 2300 officers and members of the staff availed the benefit of the Scheme. After reduction in the staff, loss of ₹ 73.28 crores in the year 2005-06 could be brought down to ₹ 16.20 crores in the year 2006-07. This made employees' unions to press their demand of wage revision. As such, the Government of India, vide letter dated 8.8.2006, promised certain assistance by way of fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resources, subject to achievement of physical/financial projections and availability of sufficient cash to meet the liability. 3) The increased obligation for salary and wages would be met through internal resources of the Company and no budgetary support will be provided for the same. You are requested to take necessary action to implement the above under intimation to this Ministry. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (A.K. SINGH) Director 10. From the above letter, it is clear that wage revision of the employees, effective only from 1.4.2003, was to be implemented w.e.f. 1.4.2006. In this connection, when the clarification is sought by the Appellant-Corporation, the Government of India vide letter dated 17.8.2006 (Annexure P-13), clarified its stand on the recommendations of Board for Reconstruction of Public Sector Enterprises (BRPSE). Accordingly, Office Order dated 25.8.2006 was issued by the Appellant-Corporation allowing wage revision to those who were on employment roll on 1.4.2003. The conjoint reading of the letters issued by the Government of India makes it amply clear that the wage revision was to be implemented with effect from 1.4.2006 allowing the employees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l right to claim that the Government should pay their salary or that the additional expenditure incurred on account of revision of their pay scale should be met by the Government. Being employees of the companies it is the responsibility of the companies to pay them salary and if the company is sustaining losses continuously over a period and does not have the financial capacity to revise or enhance the pay scale, the Petitioners cannot claim any legal right to ask for a direction to the Central Government to meet the additional expenditure which may be incurred on account of revision of pay scales. It appears that prior to issuance of the office memorandum dated 12-4-1993 the Government had been providing the necessary funds for the management of public sector enterprises which had been incurring losses. After the change in economic policy introduced in the early nineties, the Government took a decision that the public sector undertakings will have to generate their own resources to meet the additional expenditure incurred on account of increase in wages and that the Government will not provide any funds for the same. Such of the public sector enterprises (government companies) wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under: 26. It is difficult to accede to the argument on behalf of the employees that a decision of the Central Government/State Governments to limit the benefits only to employees, who retire or die on or after 1-4-1995, after calculating the financial implications thereon, was either irrational or arbitrary. Financial and economic implications are very relevant and germane for any policy decision touching the administration of the Government, at the Centre or at the State level. xxx 37. In the instant case before us, the cut-off date has been fixed as 1-4-1995 on a very valid ground, namely, that of financial constraints. Consequently, we reject the contention that fixing of the cut-off date was arbitrary, irrational or had no rational basis or that it offends Article 14. 17. In Sudhir Kumar Consul v. Allahabad Bank (2011) 3 SCC 486, which also pertains to the question of fixing of cut-off date for granting retirement benefits, this Court has laid down, in paragraph 18, as under: 18.Moreover, the fixing of the cut-off date for granting retirement benefits such as gratuity or pension under the different schemes incorporated in the subordinate legislation, thereby, c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
