This judgment dismisses a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought to have his pre-absorption deputation service counted towards the lump sum payment under the BHEL Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2003. The court held that the scheme applies only from the date of absorption in BHEL.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.NO.9071 OF 2005
M.C.Vijayaraghavan ... Petitioner v. 1. The Director (Personnel), Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Corporate Office, Asiad Office, Siri Fort, New Delhi – 110049.
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents culminating in the issuance of letter No. BAP:HR:ET:VR:24, dated 18.01.2005 of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further issue directions to the respondents to reckon the completed years of service for the purpose of computation of lump sum payment in the case of the petitioner by taking into account the initial period of service in BHEL on deputation and make the lump sum payment under VRS 2003 to the petitioner for unreckoned period of 6 months together with interest of 12% per annum.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondents culminating in the issuance of letter dated 18.01.2005 of the 2nd respondent, to quash the same and further
issue directions to the respondents to reckon the completed years of service for the purpose of computation of lump sum payment in the case of the petitioner by taking into account the initial period of service in BHEL on deputation and make the lump sum payment under VRS 2003 to the petitioner for unreckoned period of 6 months together with interest of 12% per annum.
2.1 It is the case of the petitioner that he joined the services of the Defence Accounts as Auditor in August 1968. In February 1975, he was promoted as Section Officer and continued to function in the said capacity upto April 1979. Then, on deputation, he joined the services of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (hereinafter referred to as “BHEL”) at Trichy as Senior Accountant Grade-II. In April 1982, he was absorbed in BHEL. During his tenure in BHEL, he was promoted as Senior Accountant Grade-I in 1983, Accounts Officer in 1990, Senior Accounts Officer in 1993, Deputy Manager in 1997 and Manager in 2002.
2.2 The respondents-company introduced BHEL Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2003 on 06.05.2003 and the petitioner opted for voluntary retirement as per clause 7(1) of the Scheme in addition to other terminal benefits such as G.P.F., Gratuity, Leave Enacashment, etc., the employee seeking voluntary retirement will be entitled to a lump sum one time payment equivalent to 60 days salary for each completed year of service on the monthly salary at the time of voluntary retirement multiplied by the remaining number of months of service till the normal date of superannuation whichever is less, subject to maximum of 60 months salary. The request of the petitioner was accepted and he was allowed to retire voluntarily in October 2003. While calculating the completed years of service, the 2nd respondent has calculated the services of the petitioner from the date of absorption, i.e. April 1982 and thus, while reckoning the period of service completed, only 42 months were allowed. The petitioner claims that he is entitled to 48 months salary.
2.3 The petitioner contended that one R.Ranganathan, who was his batch mate in Defence Accounts Service, who also on deputation joined the services of BHEL in 1980 and subsequently absorbed in BHEL services opted to voluntarily retire under VRS 1999 and while computing the completed years of service for the purpose of working out lump sum payment, the respondent took the date of joining in BHEL on deputation as the starting point.
2.4 Further, the petitioner contended that REMCO and MPL were merged with BHEL and after merger, the employees of REMCO and MPL were absorbed into BHEL services. When such former employees of REMCO and MPL opted for voluntary retirement, in
their case, the BHEL while computing the years of service for payment of lump sum amount, took into account the service rendered in erstwhile REMCO and MPL.
2.5 The petitioner's representation to the authorities to consider his grievance was rejected by the respondents. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed the Writ Petition.
answering the queries received from some of the Union, the BHEL replied to a query whether the services rendered by an employee in the Government /any other organisation prior to joining BHEL can be taken into account for reckoning the period of service, the BHEL replied that the services rendered prior to joining BHEL shall not be reckoned.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar Rj
+1cc to M/s.Fox Mandal & Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.92129 +1cc to Mr.Sugumar R.Rajulu, Advocate, S.R.No.91898
W.P.No.9071 of 2005
BR(CO) CS/11/12/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to reckon his period of deputation service in BHEL for the purpose of computing lump sum payment under Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2003.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the petitioner's claim for additional service period is legally sustainable.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M.C. Vijayaraghavan
The Director (Personnel), Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
The General Manager, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
M. Duraigurtham
M. A. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
