ANJUM NATH Vs. BRITISH AIRWAYS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present suit is filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree of declaration in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to be paid as per the Early Retirement Scheme as applicable in India on 08.07.2002. A decree is also sought for Rs.55 lacs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

(2.) It is contended by the plaintiff in the plaint that she was the H.R. Manager of the defendant. She was employed for more than 28 years with the defendant having joined the company on 20.05.1974 as Secretary to Assistant to Manager, Northern India in Delhi. After several promotions, on 1.7.2001 she was appointed HR Manager, South Asia in the Management Grade IMG2. It is stated that after 28 years of diligent service, the services of the plaintiff were wrongfully and illegally terminated on 8.7.2002.

(3.) It is further contended that on the said date, namely, 8.7.2002 she was called by the Department Head Ms.Amanda Ball. There she was informed that her job has been merged with another newly created role of Corporate Affairs, which she was not qualified to handle and therefore she was required to leave. It is contended that the said Ms.Amanda Ball while informing the plaintiff of the above decision gave the plaintiff two options, namely, (i) to resign from defendant No.1 with immediate effect or (ii) to have the Contract of Employment terminated with three months' pay. The said Ms.Amanda Ball had drafts of both letters ready with her. No time was given to the plaintiff inasmuch as she had to take a decision there and then as to which of the two letters she would choose. She was also told that in case she resigns she will receive a compensation under the U.K. Severance Policy i.e. one and half week's salary for every year of service upto a maximum of 30 weeks. If her services were terminated, she would not be entitled to this amount. Plaintiff sought to advise the said Ms. Amanda Ball that there was a Local ERS Scheme for staff in India which entitled her to 56 months' salary for her 28 years of service i.e. 2 months salary for each year of service. But Ms. Amanda Ball did not listen to the view of the plaintiff. Under duress, it is submitted that the plaintiff finally wrote a letter stating that she would like to apply for "Corporate Business Response Scheme". Promptly, she was handed over a letter of acceptance acknowledging her application under the "Corporate Business Response Scheme" stating that plaintiff had tendered her resignation which had been accepted by the defendant.