Page No.# 1/6 vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 681 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010176842015




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/3569/2015

         THE INDUSTRIAL PAPERSASSAM LTD. EMPLOYEES' UNION and 2 ORS.
         DHING, NAGAON, A TRADE UNION REGISTERED UNDER THE TRADE
         UNIONS ACT, 1926 REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI JUGAL CH. SAIKIA.

         2: SRI JUGAL CH. SAIKIA
          S/O SRI FEDELA KEOT R/O DHING MUNICIPAL BOARD WARD NO. 1
          P.O. DHING - 782123
          DIST. NAGAON
         ASSAM
          PRESIDENT OF THE PETITIONER NO. 1

         3: SRI NITYA NANDA MAHANTA
          S/OLT. PREMA KT. MAHANTA R/O DHING MUNICIPAL BOARD WARD NO.1
          P.O. DHING- 782123
          DIST. NAGAON
         ASSAM
          GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE PETITIONER NO. 1

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
         REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR,
         GUWAHATI- 781006.

         2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
          GOVT. OF ASSAM
          PUBLIC ENTERPRISES DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI- 781006.

         3:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
          GOVT. OF ASSMA
          INDUSTRIES and COMMERCE DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
                                                                                      Page No.# 2/6

             GUWAHATI- 781006.

            4:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE
             GOVT. OF ASSAM
             PUBLIC ENTERPRISES DEPARTMENT
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI- 781006.

            5:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE
             GOVT OF ASSAM
             INDUSTRIES and COMMERCE DEPARTMENT
             INDUSTRIES and COMMERCE DEPARTMENT
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI- 781006.

            6:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE
             GOVT. OF ASSAM
             FINANCE DEPARTMENT
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI- 781006.

            7:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

             ASSAM INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
             R.G. BARUAH ROAD
             GUWAHATI- 781024.

            8:THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER TECHNICAL
            AIDC LTD.
             and INCHARGE IPAL ASSAM INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
            LTD.
             R.G. BARUAH ROAD
             GUWAHATI- 781024

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R KALITA

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM


                                   BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

                                            ORDER

Date : 25.02.2021

Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. H. Agarwal, learned counsel for Page No.# 3/6

the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 4 and Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel for the respondent no.6. None appears on call for the Industries and Commerce Department, respondent nos.3 and 5 and for Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., respondent nos.7 and 8.

2. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner no.1, a registered trade union consisting of former employees of a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU), namely, Industrial Papers (Assam) Ltd., is agitating the cause of the former employees, who are stated to have not received their arrear salary and benefits of House Rent Allowance (HRA), Medical Allowance (MA) etc. while they were released under the revised Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) dated 15.02.2006. The grievance of the petitioners is that the former employees of the said PSU were granted ex-gratia payment at the rate of 15 day's pay (basic + DA) per completed year of service instead of 45 days pay, which had been allowed to the employees, who had taken VRS earlier. It is projected that the members of the petitioner no.1 association were in service till 17.10.2008, which was the date of closure of the said PSU. It is also agitated in this writ petition that in the meanwhile new revised pay-scale had come into effect from 01.01.2006 and, as such, the petitioners claim financial relief based on the pay revision, which came into effect from 01.01.1996, 01.01.2006 and subsequent pay revision, if any.

3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the relief claimed for by the petitioners squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the case of All Assam STATFED Karmachari Aikya Manch & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., (2014) 2 NEJ 4: (2014) 5 GLR 69 . The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the said order was unsuccessfully challenged by filing WA No.112/2015 and thereafter, it was unsuccessfully challenged before the Supreme Court of India by filing SLP(C) No.21189/2015, which was dismissed by order dated 07.12.2015. Accordingly, it is submitted that the judgment dated 03.01.2014 passed by this Court in All Assam STATFED etc. (supra) has attained finality.

4. The learned standing counsel for the Finance Department has submitted that as the employees of the erstwhile Industrial Papers (Assam) Ltd. had accepted the VRS, it is not open for the petitioner to re-agitate their claim for pay revision or for any benefits arisen out of subsequent pay revision. He has further submitted that a similar matter came up before this Court being the case of Arun Kumar Das & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., 2019 (3) GLT 209, wherein this Court by relying on the ratio laid down in the case of A.K. Bindal & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., (2003) 5 SCC 163 and Page No.# 4/6

All Assam STATEFED etc. (supra) had rejected the claim of revised pay as per Assam Services (ROP) Rules, which subsequently had come in force. Accordingly, it was submitted that only the benefits so granted in the case of Arun Kumar Das (supra) may be extended to the employees of the Industrial Papers (Assam) Ltd.

5. From the nature of averments made in the present writ petition, it appears that the petitioners are also referring to the VRS dated 15.02.2006, which was considered by this Court in the case of (i) All Assam STATFED Karmachari Aikya Manch (supra) , and (ii) Arup Kumar Das & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., 2019 (3) GLT 209. However, in the said cases, the benefit of revision of pay revision was refused because the majority of the employees of the concerned PSUs had accepted the VRS, and it was held that merely because the employees were given salary for a period beyond the date of closure of the concerned PSUs, it would not entitle the employees to revision of pay under Assam Services (RoP) Rules, 2010 w.e.f. 01.01.2006.

6. It is seen that that as per notification dated 15.02.2006, the following package for VRS was envisaged:-

a. Ex- gratia of 15 days pay (Basis pay + Dearness Allowance) only against each completed year of service rendered on for the months of service rendered on for the months of service left, whichever is less.

b. Cash payment for unutilized leave for a maximum period of 240 days (Basic Pay + Dearness Allowance only).

c. Balance of Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) dues payable as per Regulation of CPF.

d. Gratuity as per Gratuity Act.

e. Unpaid salary/ wages (Basic Pay + Dearness Allowance) upto the date of acceptance of VRS by the employees.

f. Savings of Group Insurance Scheme.

Moreover, it was also provided that in all calculations of VRS benefits, the basic pay and rate of dearness allowance would be taken as on the date of application by an employee opting for VRS and the date of closure of State Level Public Enterprise, whichever applicable. It was also provided that no request for any revision shall be entertained thereafter.

7. That considering the above, this Court in the case of All Assam STATFED Karmachari Aikya Manch (supra), had granted the employees/workers the relief of house rent allowance, medical allowance and city compensatory allowance. However, in the case of Arup Kumar Das (supra), the Page No.# 5/6

employees/ workers were granted the relief of house rent allowance and medical allowance. Therefore, following the ratio of the said two cases, the Court is inclined to allow the members of the petitioner no.1 Union the relief of house rent allowance and medical allowance, however, without the benefit of revision of pay as per the Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2010 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 or any other subsequent pay revision. Thus, prayer no. 2 stands partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. However, prayer nos. 3 and 4 of the writ petition is refused.

8. As regards prayer no. 1 for arrear salary is concerned, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the members of the petitioner no. 1 Union have not received their arrear pay. In this regard, as already indicated above, the revision of pay which came into effect after VRS notification dated 15.02.2016 had come into force would not be applicable. Moreover, with regard to the said claim, it would be relevant to refer to the judgment rendered in the case of Industrial Papers (Assam) Ltd. Employees Union Vs. Management Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., AIR 2007 SC 985: (2007) 3 SCC 73 , wherein the Supreme Court of India had observed as follows:-

15. Above being the position, the judgment of the Division Bench affirming that of learned Single Judge cannot be faulted and the appeal stands dismissed. Subject to what is stated above, dismissal of the appeal shall not stand in the way of the concerned employees or recognized Unions making claim for arrears of salaries or claims to be due from IPAL.

16. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the committee has been appointed by the High Court in the matter of arrears of salary and on the question of absorption of various sick public sector undertakings. It needs no emphasis that those are the aspects about which we have not expressed any opinion .

The said decision was rendered by the Supreme Court of India on 10.01.2007. Therefore, it is presumed that the petitioner no.1 herein, who was the appellant before the Supreme Court of India had raised its demand against claim for arrear salary within a reasonable time after the judgment was pronounced by the Supreme Court of India. Thus, it is seen that in the present writ petition filed on

15.06.2015, same relief of arrear salary is found to be renewed in prayer no.1, which is about 8 1/2

years from the date of decision by the Supreme Court of India. Therefore, in light of the herein before quoted observations made by the Supreme Court of India, the Court is not inclined to grant the relief of arrear salary to discourage multiplicity of claim because in this writ petition, no statement has been made that despite directions contained in the case of Industrial Papers (Assam) Ltd. Employees Union, no claim was made by the petitioner in respect of arrear salary. In view of the discussions above, the Page No.# 6/6

prayer no. 1 of the writ petition is also refused.

9. Therefore, Rule is made absolute in terms of relief granted in paragraph 7 above, and ordered accordingly. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this order before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Public Enterprises Department (respondent no.4) and upon receipt of the same, the said authority shall comply with this order within a period of 4 (four) months from the date of service of certified copy.

10. The parties are left to bear their own cost.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant