9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontroversy arises in the following backdrop: 4. In exercise of its powers Under Section 17A of the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, the Central Government made what is described as General Insurance Employee's Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "SVRS of 2004"). Para 3 of the scheme stipulating the eligibility conditions for employees who could opt for voluntary retirement from the services of the insurance company is as under: Eligibility (1) All permanent full time employees will be eligible to seek special voluntary retirement under this Scheme provided they have attained the age of 40 years and completed 10 years of qualifying services as on the date of notification. (2) An employee who is under suspension or against whom disciplinary proceedings are pending or contemplated shall not be eligible to opt for the scheme; Provided that the case of an employee who is under suspension or against whom disciplinary proceeding is pending or contemplated made be considered by the Board of the Company concerned having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the decision taken by the Board shall be final. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a 6 of SVRS of 2004 and para 14 of the Pension Scheme 1995, would leave no manner of doubt that any employee retiring from the service of the company/corporation would qualify for payment of pension if he/she has rendered a minimum of ten years of service on the date of retirement. The expression 'retirement' has been defined in para 2(t) of the Pension Scheme 1995 as under: 2 Definition: In this Scheme, unless the context otherwise requires: xxx xxx xxx (t) "retirement" means- (i) the retirement in accordance with the provisions contained in paragraph 12 of General Insurance (Rationalisation and Revision of Pay Scales and Other Conditions of Service of Supervisory, Clerical and Subordinate Staff) Scheme, 1974 notified under the notification of Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance(Department of Revenue and Insurance) number S.O. 326(E) dated the 27th May, 1974; (ii) the retirement in accordance with the provisions contained in paragraph 4 of the General Insurance (Termination, Superannuation and Retirement of Officers and Development Staff) Scheme, 1976 notified under notification of Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Economi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... At any time after an employee has completed twenty years of qualifying service, he may, by giving notice of not less than ninety days, writing to the appointing authority, retire from service. xxx xxx xxx (5) The qualifying service of an employee retiring voluntarily under this paragraph shall be increased by a period not exceeding five years, subject to the condition that the total qualifying service rendered by the employee shall not in any case exceed thirty years and it does not take him beyond the date of retirement. (6) The pension of an employee retiring under this paragraph shall be based on the average emoluments as defined under Clause (d) of paragraph 2 of this scheme and the increase, not exceeding five years in his qualifying service, shall not entitle him to any notional fixation of pay for the purpose of calculating his pension. 11. The SVRS of 2004 does not obviously rest the claim for payment of pension on any one of the above two provisions. That is because what is claimed by the employees-Respondents before us is not superannuation pension nor is it pension on voluntary retirement within the meaning of para 30 (supra). As a matter of fact, para 6(1)(c) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry Retirement Scheme of 2004. So interpreted, those opting for voluntary retirement under the said SVRS of 2004 would also qualify for payment of pension as they had put in the qualifying service of ten years stipulated under Para 14 of the Pension Scheme 1995. 12. We are mindful of the fact that the word 'means' used in statutory definitions generally implies that the definition is exhaustive. But that general rule of interpretation is not without an exception. An equally well-settled principle of interpretation is that the use of the word 'means' in a statutory definition notwithstanding the context in which the expression is defined cannot be ignored in any forensic exercise meant to discover the real purport of an expression. Lord Denning's observations in Hotel and Catering Industry Training Board v. Automobile Proprietary Ltd. (1968) 1 W.L.R. 1526 are, in this regard, apposite when he said: It is true that 'the industry' is defined; but a definition is not to be read in isolation. It must be read in the context of the phrase which it defines, realising that the function of a definition is to give precision and certainty to a word or phrase which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s there is anything repugnant in the subject or context. therefore in finding out the meaning to the word "insurer" in various sections of the Act, the meaning to be ordinarily given to it is that given in the definition clause. But this is not inflexible and there may be sections in the Act where the meaning may have to be departed from on account of the subject or context in which the word has been used and that will be giving effect to the opening sentence in the definition section, namely, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context. In view of this qualification, the court has not only to look at the words but also to look at the context, the collocation and the object of such words relating to such matter and interpret the meaning intended to be conveyed by the use of the words under the circumstances. Therefore, though ordinarily the word "insurer" as used in the Act would mean a person or body corporate actually carrying on the business of insurance it may be that in certain sections the word may have a somewhat different meaning. (Emphasis supplied) 14. To the same effect is the decision of this Court in Paul Enterprises and Ors. v. Rajib Chatterjee and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provision has been made. We can do no better than to extract the following passage from that decision: Interpretation must depend on the text and the context. They are the bases of interpretation. One may well say if the text is the texture, context is what gives the colour. Neither can be ignored. Both are important. That interpretation is best which makes the textual interpretation match the contextual. A statute is best interpreted when we know why it was enacted. With this knowledge, the statute must be read, first as a whole and then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by phrase and word by word. If a statute is looked at, in the context of its enactment, with the glasses of the statute maker, provided by such context, its scheme, the sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour and appear different than when the statute is looked at without the glasses provided by the context. With these glasses we must look at the Act as a whole and discover what each section, each clause, each phrase and each word is meant and designed to say as to fit into the scheme of the entire Act. No part of a statute and no word of a statute can be construed in isolation. Statute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
