SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(All) 1541

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Rajnish Kumar, Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, JJ.
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy., Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises - Appellant
Vs.
Triloki Nath Tiwari & Ors. - Respondent
Special Appeal Defective No. 94 of 2019 With Special Appeal Defective No. 170,171,162,116,135,136,161 of 2019
Decided On : 30-04-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : C.S.C.
For the Respondent: Puneet Chandra

The State and Corporation cannot escape liability to pay the benefits of the later Pay Commissions to the employees, as established in the judgments of Kapila Hingorani Vs. State of Bihar and Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and others Vs. G.S. Uppal and others.

Headnote:

Delay Condonation - Employees' Pay Revision - Companies Act, 1956, Section 617 - U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd. - 5th, 6th, and 7th Pay Commissions - Government Orders dated 11.09.2009, 16.10.2009, and 03.01.2017 - Illegal, Arbitrary, Not Applicable - Implementation of Pay Commissions - Kapila Hingorani Vs. State of Bihar (2003) 6 SCC 1 - Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and others Vs. G.S. Uppal and others (2008) 7 SCC 375

Fact of the Case:

The appeals were filed against the order allowing writ petitions by employees of U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd. seeking implementation of the 5th, 6th, and 7th Pay Commissions, challenging Government Orders imposing restrictive conditions.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the State and Corporation cannot escape liability to pay the benefits of the later Pay Commissions to the employees, declaring the Government Orders illegal and arbitrary, and directing the implementation of the Pay Commissions within three months.

Issues: The main issue was whether the employees of the Corporation had a legal right to claim revision of pay scale despite financial constraints faced by the Corporation and the Government's refusal to provide financial support.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgments in Kapila Hingorani Vs. State of Bihar and Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and others Vs. G.S. Uppal and others, emphasizing that the State and Corporation cannot escape liability to pay the benefits of the later Pay Commissions to the employees.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals and directed the phased implementation of the 5th, 6th, and 7th pay commissions within 18 months.

JUDGMENT :

1. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application is sufficient. Delay of 72 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 94 of 2019, 125 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 170 of 2019, 119 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 171 of 2019, 118 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 162 of 2019, 89 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 116 of 2019, 104 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 135 of 2019, 104 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 136 of 2019 and 118 days in filing the Special Appeal Defective No. 161 of 2019 are condoned.

2. Heard Sri Raghvendra Singh, learned Advocate General assisted by Sri Amitabh Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the appellant and Sri Mohd. Altaf Mansoor, Sri Puneet Chandra and Sri N.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 41 and Sri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 42, i.e., U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd.

3. The present bunch of appeals have been filed against the order dated 26.11.2018 passed in four writ petitions filed by the employees of U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd., whereby the learned Writ Court has allowed the writ petitions by declaring restrictive conditions imposed by the Government Orders dated 11.09.2009, 16.10.2009 and 03.01.2017 to be illegal, arbitrary, not applicable and were quashed with a direction to the authorities to implement the recommendations of the 5th, 6th and 7th Pay Commissions with regard to the employees of the U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd. from the date the same is implemented with regard to the State Government employees within three months.

4. All appeals arise out of order dated 26.11.2018 and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they were heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. The facts are taken from Special Appeal (Defective) No. 94 of 2019.

5. In the year 1966, U.P. Handicrafts Development and Marketing Corporation Ltd. (formerly-U.P. Export Corporation Ltd.) (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporation') was formed and registered as a Public Corporation under the Companies Act, 1956. 100% paid up capital of the Corporation was owned by the State of U.P. The respondent no. 42 is Government Corporation as per section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. All the private respondents are employees of the said Corporation. The primary purpose for establishment of the Corporation was to develop, promote and export the handicrafts and other various products manufactured by the small scale sector of the State. The products so manufactured were exported, displayed and sold by the Corporation, through its showrooms popularly knowns as 'Gangotri'. The respondent no. 42-the Corporation works as an agency of the State Government, for promotion of export from the State of U.P., as per policy of the State Government. As per Article of Association, the Governor of U.P. has right to appoint and remove the Chairman, Vice Chairman and Board of Directors of the Corporation. Even for making capital expenditure exceeding Rs. 10 Lakhs and acquisition of capital assets of an immovable nature, it compulsorily requires approval of the Governor of the State. Different Government officers are appointed as its Chairman and Directors. By order dated 31.03.1971, the handicrafts division of the Government of U.P., functioning under the Director of Industries, U.P., was merged with the Corporation. The employees of the said handicraft division of the State were absorbed in the Corporation. By a Government Order dated 21.03.1975 it was further clarified that the employees/officers of the Public Enterprises/Corporations are public servant as defined under Section 21 of the I.P.C. In the year 1982, U.P. Export Corporation Employees Service Rules, 1982 were framed after receiving approval from the Bureau of Public

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top