Delhi High Court
Idpl Vrs/Retired Employees ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 July, 2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA 576/2013
IDPL VRS/RETIRED EMPLOYEES WELFARE
FEDERATION GURGAON, THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY, Y R SURI & ORS ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Y.R. Suri, Secretary of the
Appellants.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna and
Mr. Kartikeya Bhargava,
Advocates for R-1.
Mr. R.S. Mathur, Advocate for
R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. GARG
ORDER
16.07.2014
: REVA KHETRAPAL, J. (Oral)
CM No.12151/2013
This is an application praying for condonation of 31 days delay
in re-filing the appeal.
For the reasons stated in para 2 of the application, the delay in
re-filing is condoned.
Application stands disposed of.
LPA 576/2013
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8th April,
2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.261/2010.
2. The Appellant Nos.2 to 8 and Respondent Nos.4 to 566 are
amongst the 6572 employees of the Indian Drugs and
Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (for short "IDPL") who had opted for Voluntary
Retirement on 31.12.2002 and have now filed the writ petition
seeking benefits of the 5th Pay Commission.
3. By a Circular dated 03.02.2009, the Ministry of Chemicals and
Fertilizers, Department of Pharmaceuticals informed the
implementation of the revised pay scale of the 5th Pay Commission
with effect from 02.02.2009 to the existing employees of IDPL.
4. The Appellants claim that as per the guidelines bearing DPE
O.M. No.2(32)/97-DPE (WC) GL-XXXV dated 08.12.2000 and
Office Memorandum dated 28.02.2002 issued by the Government of
India, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises,
Department of Public Enterprises, they are entitled for recalculation
of the ex-gratia on the basis of the revised scales of pay, and other
consequential benefits like gratuity, leave encashment, etc. on account
of revision in the pay scales. The Respondents, on the other hand,
contend that no arrears have been paid to any person prior to
02.02.2009.
5. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, after
noticing that the Supreme Court in the case of Officers and
Supervisors of IDPL vs. Chairman and MD, IDPL and Ors., (2003)
6 SCC 490, which pertained to the very same company viz., IDPL
(the Respondent No.3 in the writ petition), has held that persons who
have taken VRS cannot be entitled to the benefit of pay revision. The
Supreme Court in the said case further recognized the economic
incapability of the Respondent No.3 and the heavy losses incurred by
it in the last many years as well as the pendency of the matter before
the BIFR for declaring the IDPL as a sick unit. The Supreme Court
also laid down that the economic capability of the employer plays a
crucial part while implementing any of the recommendations of the
Central Pay Commission. Further, the Supreme Court relied upon the
observations in its earlier judgment in the case of A.K. Bindal and
Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors., (2003) 5 SCC 163, wherein the
Supreme Court had observed that as per "golden handshake"
principle, on taking VRS by an employee, the jural relationship of
employer and employee comes to an end and an employee thereafter
cannot rake up the issue of claim of arrears on account of pay
revision.
6. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that the learned Single
Judge did not find any merit in the writ petition filed on behalf of
Appellants and dismissed the writ petition.
7. No cogent reason could be pointed out to us by the Appellant
as to why we should interfere with the decision of the learned Single
Judge which is premised on the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Officers and Supervisors of IDPL (supra).
8. The appeal is consequently dismissed. There shall be no order
as to costs.
REVA KHETRAPAL
JUDGE
S.P. GARG
JUDGE
July 16, 2014
km
