Kerala High Court
Krishnan G vs Hmt Machine Tools Limited on 13 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 25533 OF 2015
PETITIONER:
KASMI KOYA
AGED 55 YEARS
WORKER SUPERVISOR, T NO.3783/M 152, HMT IV,
RESIDING AT C 6/4, HMT QUARTER, HMT COLONY P.O,
KALAMASSERY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.BALACHANDRAN (MANGALATH)
SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN
SRI.RAJESH NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED
HMT COLONY P.O, KALAMASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL MANAGER, PIN - 683 104.
2 HMT LIMITED
HMT BHAVAN, 59, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE, PIN 560
032, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING
DIRECTOR.
3 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEAVY
INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 110 001.
BY ADVS.
SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).29695/2015, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 29695 OF 2015
PETITIONER:
KRISHNAN G.
AGED 58 YEARS
ACCOUNTS SUPERINTENDENT, T.NO.3994/0500,HMT IV,
RESIDING AT C/63, HMT QUARTERS, HMT COLONY P.O.,
KALAMASSERY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.BALACHANDRAN (MANGALATH)
SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN
SRI.RAJESH NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED
HMT COLONY P.O., KALAMASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL MANAGER, PIN-683104.
2 HMT LIMITED
HMT BHAVAN, 59, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE, PIN-560032
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR.
3 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEAVY
INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110001.
BY ADVS.
SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
SRI. P. VIJAYAKUMAR - ASGI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).25533/2015, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in these two cases - which have
been heard together on account of the analogous
factual circumstances pleaded - are stated to be
working as Accounts Superintendent and Worker
Supervisor in the services of the 1st respondent -
HMT Machine Tools Ltd. Their allegation is that in
spite of the fact that the note dated 09.10.2014,
issued by the 1st respondent, enhancing the age of
retirement of their employees to 60 years, said
benefit has not been granted to them and they,
therefore, pray that respondents be directed to
allow them to continue until the age of 60.
2. When this matter was called today, it was
brought to my notice that both the petitioners have
now crossed the age of 60 and that this matter has
been pending before this Court for the last more
than 6 years without any interim order in their
favour.
3. Shri.Saji Varghese, learned Standing Counsel
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
appearing or the 1st respondent - HMT Machine Tools
Ltd., submitted that this writ petition has been
filed by the petitioners under a mistaken notion
that the note dated 09.10.2014 was intended to
benefit all the employees. He submitted that this is
not the case because it has been made crystally
clear by the Government of India that it is only in
the case of profit making companies that this
benefit of extension of retirement would apply; but
that since HMT Machine Tools Ltd. is running on loss
even today, as it was at the time when this writ
petition was filed, said benefit cannot be granted
to them. He, therefore, prayed that this writ
petition be dismissed.
4. I notice from the files that, as correctly
stated by Shri.Saji Varghese, petitioners are now
well over 60 years of age. Even at the time when
they approached this Court in the year 2015, they
had crossed the age of 57 and were nearing 58 years.
Obviously, therefore, the reliefs now sought for by
them cannot be granted by this Court.
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
5. Nevertheless, even if I am to consider the
merits of the contentions of the rival parties, it
is clear that the benefit of extension of age of
retirement will be applicable only to companies
which are making profit and since Shri.Saji Varghese
affirms that the 1st respondent - HMT Machine Tools
Ltd. is still garnering losses, this benefit cannot
be granted to them.
In the afore circumstances these writ petitions
are dismissed without any further orders.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/13.7
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25533/2015
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE NOTE DATED 9.10.14 OF THE GENERAL
MANAGER (HR) HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED.
EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.7.15 PASSED BY THE
HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN WPC 31181-85 &
31186/15.
EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.7.15 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
WP(C)Nos.25533 & 29695 OF 2015
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29695/2015
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER AND APPOINTMENT ORDER
DT.19-6-2001 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE DT.9-10-2014 OF THE
GENERAL MANAGER (HR) HMT MACHINE TOOLS LIMITED.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.16-9-2015 ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.29-7-2015
PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN WPC
31181-85 AND 31186/15.
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.20-8-2015
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 25533/2015.
