R.K. SRIVASTAVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions are raising common question and are arising out of similar facts and, therefore, are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) IN Writ Petn. No. 1115 of 1997, 15 petitioners in all have prayed for writ of mandamus, inter alia, declaring that the imposition of income -tax on the interest earned by each of the petitioner on their retirement/terminal benefits from 2nd respondent No. 2, as arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal, unconscionable and fraud on power and upon the petitioners. It is further prayed that a writ may be issued directing the respondents to refund the TDS (@ 10 per cent of the interest earned on the retirement benefits) deducted by them while releasing the remaining amount along with interest @ 18 per cent p.a. till payment and have further prayed to restrain the respondents from taking coercive action against the petitioners for compelling them to pay income -tax on the said amount of interest. Thus the allegations are made against : (1) respondent No. 1, Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communications; (2) the Secretary, Ministry of Finance and (3) the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Pension and Public Grievance. The allegations made against respondent No. 1 are that the conduct of respondent No. 1 is thoroughly unfair and rather fraudulent inasmuch it has gone back on the representations held out to the petitioners on which each of them acted in seeking to take undue advantage of their own actions and omission to deprive the petitioners of their legitimate dues.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that they were earlier employed by the Overseas Communication Services, a Department of the Ministry of Communication, Government of India. In or about 1989, a decision was taken by the Government of India to create a central public sector undertaking known as "Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd." (for short person was not willing to opt in favour of absorption, then he was to be transferred to the surplus staff cell for deployment against possible vacancies in the Government offices. If one would have accepted the option of becoming a employee had an option either to draw pro rata pension monthly or to draw a lump sum amount in lieu of 100 per cent pro rata pension. In case it was decided to take in lump sum, the amount was to be paid on the expiry of 7 years from the date of permanent absorption. There was a provision for payment earlier in the event of certain eventualities before the period of 7 years. The amount which earned interest at the rate prescribed was to be paid as per memorandum dt.