Appellants were school teachers who accepted a Voluntary Retirement Scheme due to the company's closure of schools. The High Court held that they could not challenge the scheme or demand re-employment after accepting benefits, though priority might be given in future recruitment.
No specific relief granted; appeal rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
FRIDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2007 / 29TH ASHADHA 1929
WA.No. 2086 of 2006(D) --------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15617/2004 Dated 05/07/2006 ....................
APPELLANTS: PETITIONERS 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 14, 15 & 16
(FORMERLY H.S.A., FACT SCHOOL, AMBALAMEDU) `UTHRAM', PALACE GARDENS, KARINGACHIRA, TRIPUNITHURA.
W.A.2086/2006
-2-
VAYALINKAL HOUSE, GARDEN LAND, HILL PALACE P.O., TRIPUNITHURA.
BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.K.K.RAJEEV SMT.C.V.RAJALAKSHMI
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS
R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHAMMED PUZHAKKARA, ADDL.CGSC R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR
SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2007 ALONG WITH WA NO. 1785 OF 2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------------------------------------- W.A.Nos.2086 of 2006 & 1785 of 2006
Dated, this the 20th day of July, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L. DATTU, CJ.
The issues raised in these two appeals are common. Therefore they are clubbed together and disposed of by this common order.
2
W.A.Nos.2086 & 1785 of 2006
the schools and after doing so they had offered the VRS scheme to its teaching and non-teaching staff. Petitioners are some of those who had opted for the VRS scheme and had received the benefits and, therefore, as a matter of right they cannot question either the VRS scheme offered by the company or the acceptance of the offer to retire from service voluntarily made by the petitioner by the respondent-company.
3
W.A.Nos.2086 & 1785 of 2006
4
W.A.Nos.2086 & 1785 of 2006
the respondents may take into consideration the length of service of the appellants in the school run by the management and if some priority could be given to them, it would definitely help those teaching and non-teaching staff who are displaced from service half-way through their career.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
mt/DK
3 issues framed by the court
Whether teachers who voluntarily retired under a VRS scheme can challenge its arbitrary nature.
Whether retired teachers can claim re-deployment in the company after accepting retirement benefits.
Whether a new re-employment scheme can override the bar on voluntary retirement.
Indira P.S. and others
The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd.
H.L. Dattu
K.T. Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
