N VISWANATHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the Writ petition in W.P.No.953 of 2006 the second respondent is a company registered under the Companies Act, with the object of promoting, supporting and protecting, maintaining and increasing the export of cloth and yarn. The petitioner, who was working as Lower Division Clerk/Data Entry Operator under the second respondent from 19.10.1990, was promoted as Upper Division Clerk on 26.06.2000. On the basis of the agreement entered by the Government of INdia with the World Trade Organisation, since direct export trade has been restricted, the petitioner's services were terminated by the second respondent on 01.03.2005 on the basis that the second respondent is desirous of closing the Madras unit. The second respondent has earlier introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme and at that time the petitioner has not opted for the same. According to the petitioner, the appointment is on all INdia basis and the vacancies are available in other places, therefore, the termination is back.

(2.) IT is also admitted case that the petitioner has accepted the terminal benefits given by the second respondent, however, he was forced to do so, according to the petitioner. In view of the same, when the second respondent has introduced Voluntary Retirement Scheme, the employees of Madras unit have made joint representation, there was no reply.

(3.) IN W.P.No.955 of 2006, the petitioner was working as Lower Division Clerk/Typist in Chennai office of the the second respondent from 01.09.1988 and promoted as Stenographer/UDC from November 1992 and he was also terminated on 01.03.2005. It is also admitted that out of 7 persons working in the second respondent company, the above 3 persons have filed the writ petitions.