VANITA BORAKAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is working as a Draftsman in the establishment of the respondent M.P. Laghu Udyog Nigam Ltd. has filed this petition claiming parity of pay and emoluments as given to the State Government employees in accordance with the Revision of Pay Rules, 1990. It is submitted that the petitioner's claim was favourably recommended by the Board of Directors but the State Government by its decision dated 10-9-2000 has rejected the recommendation of the Board of Director. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 10-9-2000 by incorporating amendment in the petition.

(2.) The respondent No. 2 has filed a return and stated that the petitioner has alternative statutory efficacious remedy of approaching the labour Court under the provisions of Industrial Law in view of the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of R.S.R.T. Corporation v. Krishnakant, 1995 5 SCC 75. The respondent No. 2 by way of preliminary objection has also stated that the petitioner has already availed of the benefit of Voluntary Retirement Scheme and therefore in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of A.K. Bindal v. Union of India, 2003 5 SCC 163, she cannot claim any right regarding enhancement of pay scale etc. The fact that the petitioner has taken V.R.S. is undisputed.

(3.) The Supreme Court in the case of A.K. Bindal has held as under:--