FILM FACTORY WORKERS UNION Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petitions, referred to above, seek to challenge the action of the respondents, whereby, monies paid, in the form of allowances, are sought to be adjusted against terminal benefits, payable to employees under a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (in short VRS Scheme), formulated by the Hindustan Photo Films Manufacturing Co. Ltd., (in short HPF). 1.1. It is the assertion of the petitioners that, the adjustment of allowances is contrary to the terms of the settlements, arrived at with the management of HPF, from time to time, and, therefore, no adjustment can be made, as is sought to be attempted by the HPF, by taking recourse to the circulars, dated 10.07.2013 and 31.7.2013.

(2.) I may only note, at the very outset that, while what is indicated above is the main thrust of the three Writ Petitions placed before me, the reliefs claimed are slightly different, inasmuch as, in so far as Writ Petition No.24355 of 2013 is concerned, the challenge is laid to both circulars, i.e., circulars dated 10.07.2013 and 31.07.2013, while in the other two Writ Petitions, there is only a challenge to the second circular, i.e., circular dated 31.07.2013. 2.1. It may also be pertinent to note that in W.P.No.24355 of 2013, a further relief is sought, in the form of a direction to the respondents, for continued payment of Special Performance Allowance (in short SPA) and adjustable amount, as per the terms of the settlements, dated 17.08.2009 and 25.4.2011, till such time they are varied, if at all, via negotiated settlements. Payment of all arrears is also sought, commencing from April, 2013. 2.2. This latter part of the relief is not sought for by the petitioners in the other two Writ Petitions being: W.P.Nos.24460 and 25491 of 2013. 2.3. It is common ground as between parties appearing in the matter that the decision in W.P.No.24355 of 2013 would cover the issues raised in the other two Writ Petitions. As would be evident, the reliefs sought for in W.P.No.24355 of 2013, in effect, could be exemplified as the genus, whereas, the relief sought for in other two Writ Petitions are only a specie of the said genus. The genus would cover, quite clearly, the specie.

(3.) Before I advert to the submissions of counsels appearing for both sides, I would like to allude to the broad facts, which, possibly have led to the institution of these Writ Petitions. Prefatory facts: