P SWAMINATHAN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are employees of the second respondent. They secured orders for transfer at their own request and agreed to forego travelling allowances etc. on such transfers. The payment of travelling allowance on transfer is provided for in the General Insurance (Rationalisation and Revision of Pay Scales and other conditions of Service of Supervisory, Clerical and Subordinate Staff) Scheme, 1974, hereinafter referred to as the Scheme, which was framed by the Central Government pursuant to the powers under S. 16 of the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act (Act 57 of 1972), hereinafter referred to as the Act. The applicability of the Act and the Scheme to the matters in hand is not in dispute. The petitioners chose to file Claim Petition No. 38 of 1976, before the first respondent under S. 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, praying for computation of the benefits of travelling allowance etc. due to them under the scheme. Respondents 2 and 3 herein, who were party respondents before the first respondents in the said claim petition, put forth a contest that the petitioners agree to waive the benefits of travelling allowance etc on transfers, the transfers having been effected at the specific request of the petitioners themselves, and hence they are disentitle from claiming the same. The first respondent assessed the question and upheld the contention of respondents 2 and 3 The first respondent, in any event, chose to compute the monetary benefits due to the petitioners; but however in view of the finding that the agreement to waive the benefits of travelling allowance on transfers will disentitle the petitioners form claiming the same, he did not grant an relief to the petitioners and the claim petition was dismissed. The present writ petitions have been field, impugning the order of the first respondent in the claim petition.

(2.) BEFORE the first respondent, there was no dispute that the transfers were effected only at the specific request of the petitioners and on their agreeing to waive the benefits of travelling allowance etc. on such transfers. On behalf of the petitioners, reliance was placed on clause 25 of the Scheme which runs as follows :

(3.) IT was submitted before the first respondent - and the same submission has been repeated before me - that by virtue of clause 25 of the Scheme, any agreement or award or other instrument contrary to the provisions of the Scheme shall have no effect and the Scheme will override such agreement. The respondent repelled the above submissions by holding that clause 25 of the Scheme could have reference only to an agreement or award or other instrument, which was in force on the day when the Scheme was implemented and the expressions 'for the time being in force' occurring in clause 25 of the Scheme covers only and agreement or award or other instrument in force on the day when the Scheme was implemented.