Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, J.
All India Aircraft Engineers Association - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11020 of 2020, CM No. 1731 of 2021 and W.P.(C) 416 of 2021, CM No. 1098 of 2021
Decided On : 07-02-2022
The court upheld the rationalization of employee allowances during the Covid-19 pandemic as legal, rejecting claims of discrimination and violations of constitutional rights.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19 and 21 - Rationalisation of allowances - Challenge against the unilateral reduction of allowances without consultation - The impugned orders were justified as a necessary financial measure during the Covid-19 pandemic, balancing public interest and economic survival - Discrimination claims by the petitioners rejected as the measures were applied uniformly within the organization amid financial distress. (Paras 1, 3, 43-60)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, employee associations, challenged orders from AI Engineering Services Ltd. that reduced allowances due to financial distress caused by the pandemic, arguing it was discriminatory and violated constitutional rights. (Paras 1-5, 9, 10)
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the respondents' decision, finding the financial distress and necessity for cost management justified the measures taken and that no violation of constitutional rights occurred. (Paras 49-60)
Issues: The main issues revolved around the legality of unilateral salary cuts during the pandemic, alleged discrimination, and the appropriateness of the reductions imposed. (Paras 60)
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the rationalization orders were plausible in light of the financial context and did not constitute illegal or discriminatory practices as argued by the petitioners. (Paras 48-50, 60)
Result: Petitions dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petitions filed against allowance rationalisation. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenges raised regarding articles and unfair deductions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. executive pilots association challenges multiple orders. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's authority on maintainability and rationality of decisions. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 59) |
| 5. petitions dismissed without precluding future reviews. (Para 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J.
As both the writ petitions involve identical issues, the same are being decided through this common order:-
W.P.(C) 11020/2020
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are two associations, All India Aircraft Engineers. Association and Air India Aircraft Engineers. Association with the following prayers:-
"In view of the above mentioned facts, circumstances and grounds, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased:-
a. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari against the office order ref no.: AIESL/COP/2020/1452 dated 23rd July 2020;
b. issue a appropriate writ, order or command directing the Respondent to disburse salary of the Petitioner Associations on time.
c. to pass such other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice in favour of the Petitioners;"
2. In substance, the challenge in this petition is to an office order dated July 23, 2020 whereby the respondent AI Engineering Services Ltd. (`AIESL' for short) has rationalised the allowances of employees of AIESL which includes Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (the petitioners herein), Support Service Engineers, Service Engineers, Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (737 Vertical), Technician (737 Vertical), Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (ATR Vertical), Technician (ATR Vertical), General category Officers, Clerical and allied category staff and unskilled category, Fixed Term Employees of AIESL.
3. Mr. Sanjay Hegde, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the impugned order by which allowances have been reduced, has been passed unilaterally without consultation and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. According to him, Air India and Indian Airlines were merged into a single entity in the year 2007 and a company being NACIL was established which was renamed in, 2010 as Air India Ltd. under the administrative control of the Ministry of Civil Aviation (respondent No.1). The entire Engineering and Engine Overhaul Department of respondent No. 2, Air India, was hived off to be made as respondent No. 3 i.e. All India Engineering Services Ltd. (AISEL). The said respondent assured members of the petitioner association that they would be getting pay, allowances and other benefits as would have been applicable to them had they continued in the parent company.
4. Mr. Hegde laid stress on the fact that the respondent No.3 company AIESL is running in profits, as per the admission in the impugned order itself. Furthermore, no financial emergency had been declared at the time of issuance of the impugned order and the respondent No. 3 was running into profit as well as members of the association were also working throughout the pandemic inasmuch as they worked on the mission Vande Bharat mission, which was successful and was lauded everywhere.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is the unequal cuts in the gross pay due to economic measures imposed by the respondent No. 3 has no rationale with respect to imposing different deductions for the employees working under it.
6. Mr. Hegde would submit that an affidavit was filed before the Supreme Court wherein in paragraph 17, it was specifically stated that the members of the petitioner association would be getting pay, allowances and other benefits as applicable to them had they continued in the parent company. The respondent No. 1 has viol
