AMIYA PADA CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants before us having been unsuccessful in getting relief in their above writ petition have preferred instant appeal against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 1st March 2008. By the said impugned judgment and order the learned trial Judge disposed of several writ petitions having found Identical and similar points were being agitated, and the aforesaid writ petition was one of them.The fact constituting the grievance of the appellants before the learned Trial Judge is as follows:

(2.) From the statement and averment made in the petition it appears that the appellants have highlighted two grievances. Firstly they were erstwhile employees of the Government as such their conditions of service which includes payment of pension cannot be changed and/or varied by the respondent No. 6 after absorption. Secondly they have been paid less amount of gratuity. The grievance against the Government of West Bengal is that the Government has failed to make provision for pension scheme for the employees like appellants and though the employees who were similarly circumstanced and placed likewise the appellants have been given pensionary benefits In the other State Government undertaking.

(3.) The case of the respondent No.6 is briefly stated hereunder. In the affidavit affirmed by one Tarun Kumar Sen Sharma on behalf of the respondent No.6 has stated that appellants (writ petitioners} and each of them were all temporary government employees under the Durgapur Industries Board. After on Durgapur Projects Limited being incorporated they exercised their option for continuing their services in newly incorporated body. Accordingly in terms of the notification on and from 1961 they became employees of the Durgapur Projects Limited. The respondent No.6 being a Government Company framed and published standing orders providing terms and conditions of service of its employees and also prescribing financial and terminal benefits which will be granted to the employees of the Durgapur Projects Limited on their retirements. Those terms and conditions were acted upon by all the persons concerned as the present appellants without demur or objection had accepted the same. As a matter of fact they became direct employees of the respondent No. 6 unlike the permanent government staff whose terms and conditions of service with government prior to absorption had to be accepted by the respondent No.6. Rules were framed by the respondent No.6 regulating payment of Gratuity to its regular employees from 1963. Obviously on commencement of Gratuity Act 1972 necessary amendment to the State Rules was made as under the Act minimum and maximum amounts of Gratuity have been prescribed and with the Amendment of the said Act, minimum and maximum amount of Gratuity were also revised. The respondent No, 6 also issued necessary amendment orders and the retired employees were paid different amount of Gratuity, as was permissible on the date of retirement under terms and conditions of the Gratuity Act 1972. The appellants and each of them having accepted the amount of gratuity and provident fund without any demur and objection had acted upon the said terms and conditions of service. After having accepted the same now they have come long after their retirement with the illegal and unreasonable prayer for payment of pension. It is also stated that similar grievance was raised by a group of retired employees in writ petitions being 16589(W) of 1998 and 8982(W) of 2004. The writ petition filed in 1998 was dismissed however in the second writ petition of 2004 an order was passed by the Hon'ble trial Judge directing the Managing Director of Respondent No. 6 to take reasoned decisions dealing with this problem after giving an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners. In pursuance of such decision reasoned order was passed by the Managing Director of Respondent No, 6. By the reasoned order the claim and contentions were not allowed as such the same has been challenged by filing a writ petition being W.P.No. 2262 (V) of 2005 which Is still pending In this Court. Therefore, the grievance of the appellants which is Identical and similar to that of those group of retired employees are not required to be adjudicated any more as those points are hit by the principle of res Judicata and analogous thereto.