IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Thakker C.K., C.J. Dr. Chandrachud D.Y., J.
S.V. Vasaikar others .... Petitioners.
Versus
Union of India others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition Nos. 5373 5374 of 2002, decided on 31-1/14-2-2003.
Advocates appeared :
M.S. Ramamurthy i/b., Sai Kumar Ramamurthy, for petitioners.
P.M. Pradhan with Suresh Kumar, respondent Nos. 1 2.
K.J. Presswalla i/b. Mulla Mulla and Craigie Blunt and Caroe, for respondent No. 3.
2. So far as the first petition, i.e., Writ Petition No. 5373 of 2002, is concerned, a declaration is sought that as there was breach of terms and conditions of absorption by Government of India because of disinvestment of its equity stake in Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. ('V.S.N.L.', for short) in favour of a private company, the petitioners and all similarly situated persons are entitled to reopt to receive Government pensionary benefits by refunding the amounts received by them as pro rata pension/lumpsum payment at the time of their absorption with V.S.N.L. It was also prayed that the Government of India is liable to pay to the petitioners and all similarly situated employees pensionary benefits as per Government Rules on their re-opting for Government pensionary benefits. Consequential reliefs were also sought.
3. In the second petition, i.e., Writ Petition No. 5374 of 2002, a prayer is made for declaring that the action of the respondents in not giving the petitioners and similarly situated employees, who had not completed ten years of service with the Government of India, the right to exercise option for retaining Government pensionary benefits on their absorption with V.S.N.L. is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It was, therefore, prayed that appropriate direction be issued to the Government of India that the petitioners and similarly situated employees, who had not completed ten years of service on their date of absorption in V.S.N.L., are entitled to exercise option for retaining Government pensionary benefits by counting their service in Government of India along with their service with V.S.N.L. for such benefits.
4. The case of the petitioners is that in 1986, the Government of India created V.S.N.L. by converting V.S.N.L. as a wholly-owned Government Public Sector Company, Several employees were working with V.S.N.L. at that time. On December 11, 1989, notices were given to the employees working in V.S.N.L. on deputation asking them to exercise option either to be absorbed in the regular service of V.S.N.L. with effect from January, 1990 or to retain Government benefits in respect of pension and other benefits. According to the petitioners, employees, who had not completed ten years in Government service, were not entitled to pensionary benefits, and hence, no option was given to them. V.S.N.L. has given certain terms and conditions in respect of pensionary benefits after exercising the option by the employees to be absorbed with it. It was mentioned that the permanent Government employees could give an option to retain pensionary benefits available to them in accordance with the Government Rules or they could opt for being governed by rules of V.S.N.L. Such option was also made available to quasi-permanent as well as temporary employees. A copy of the memorandum is annexed to the petition. It is stated by the petitioners that several employees in various non-executive cadres opted for absorption with V.S.N.L. and to receive pro rata pension/lumpsum amount.
5. The petitioners, however, stated that in 2000-01, the Government of India took a policy decision of disinvestment of V.S.N.L. shares, petitioner No. 3, Federation of the Videsh Sanchar Nigam Employees Union, therefore, wrote a letter to the Hon'ble Minister for Communications, Government of India, on December 12, 2000, requesting him that sale of V.S.N.L. shares must ensure safeguards and guarantees for the employees of V.S.N.L., including job security, proper emoluments, pensionary benefits, etc. Such letter was also written in January, 2001, reiterating what was stated in the earlier letter. The attention of the Minister was also invited to sub-rules (25) and (26) of Rule 37-A
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.