An employee who voluntarily retires and accepts benefits cannot later retract such decision based on unfounded claims of coercion, especially after a prolonged delay.

JUDGMENT :

M.K. THAKKER, J.

1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the award dated 30.05.2019 passed by the learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (T) No. 1348 of 2004, whereby the disengagement of the respondent was held to be illegal and the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- in addition to the amount already paid under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner Company is engaged in the business of manufacturing Air Compressors and Vacuum Pumps. The respondent was employed with the petitioner establishment since the year 1994 and was working as a Technician in the Assembly Department of the SCBU Division of the Company. On 10.05.1999, the Company introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS), offering compensation and benefits as per the terms of the scheme. The Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) was applicable to all permanent employees, including Managers, Executives, and Superintendents, who were over 40 years of age and had completed at least 10 years of continuous permanent service with the establishment. Initially, the scheme was operational from 01.07.1999 to 31.03.2000 and was subsequently extended. Approximately 187 employees availed the benefits of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) between November 1997 and December 2001. The respondent submitted his application opting for voluntary retirement on 23.04.2001, which was accepted by the Company on 13.05.2001. However, prior to the acceptance, the respondent made a request to continue working for a few more months, which was considered and granted by the petitioner on humanitarian grounds. Thereafter, the respondent again submitted a fresh application for voluntary retirement on 10.12.2001, which was accepted on 11.12.2001. The petitioner accordingly issued a relieving order and service certificate on 15.12.2001. The respondent was paid Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS), Rs.3,001/- as a gift, Rs.3,032/- as leave encashment, Rs.2,78,973/- towards gratuity, Rs.10,838/- under the GSLI claim, and Rs.2,957.26/- towards bonus for the year 2001–2002. In total, the respondent received Rs.7,97,801.26/- pursuant to his voluntary retirement application.

2.1. However, after a lapse of nearly 2.5 years, on 31.05.2004, the respondent raised a grievance through his Union alleging that he was coerced into retiring from service. Based on this grievance, the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner referred the dispute for adjudication to the learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad, under Reference (T) No.1348 of 2004 on 21.09.2004, for the issue of whether the respondent should be reinstated with full back wages. The respondent filed his statement of claim on 18.01.2005, nearly six years after the actual date of retirement, alleging that no Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) scheme was in existence in December 2001 and that he was forced to retire. The petitioner, in response, filed its written statement contending that the respondent had voluntarily resigned from the service and on his application to pay the gratuity the amount was paid. It was further contended that the complaint was filed three years after the respondent’s voluntary retirement. Learned court, on considering the evidence placed by both the parties as well as the submission made has awarded the reference in favour of the respondent which is subject matter of challenge before this Court.

3. Heard learned advocate Mr.Nirav Joshi for the petitioner and learned ad