BHOLANATH RAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A section of the retired employees of Kolkata Port Trust complain that the Central Government is yet to revise their pays in accordance with two notifications issued.

(2.) The learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners refers to the initial revision of pay scale. He submits that, by a subsequent decision dated March 19, 1996 the initial revision was set aside. The decision dated March 19, 1996 was assailed by way of several writ petitions. Ultimately, by an order dated April 6, 2011 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the authorities were directed to take a fresh decision after hearing the writ petitioners therein and after taking into consideration their grievances for the purpose of fixation of pay scale. He submits that, such exercise has not been done till date. The learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners rely upon a decision in the case of Abid Hussain and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., reported in AIR 1987 SC 820 and submits that, the benefits available to the employees should be extended to the retired employees also for the same period of time. He relies upon a decision in the case of Tukaram Kana Joshi and Ors. v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and Ors., reported in 2013 (1) SCC 353 and submits that, delay and laches by themselves do not defeat the right of a writ petition. He relies upon a decision in the case of Vimla Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in 1990 (Supp) SCC 770 for the same proposition.

(3.) The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Kolkata Port Trust submits that, his client is the implementing authority. The decision of pay fixation is to be taken by the Central Government. He submits that, the writ petitioners have come after retirement and the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench is limited to the writ petitioners in those matters.