NALINEE KUMAR SAHU Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an erstwhile employed of Orissa State Co-operative Handicrafts.Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation"). He was appointed as An Asst. Master Craftsman (Scrapping) on 29.7.1985. By office order dated 08.09.1988 his service were regularised w.e.f. 01.9.1986. He was receiving regular scale admissible to the post and it is submitted discharged his duties to the fullest satisfaction of all the authorities concerned. While matter stood thus, the Corporation took a decision to voluntarily retire some of the employees and to down size the surplus and unproductive labour force. Consequently a resolution was passed and Model Voluntary Retirement Scheme was framed by the Corporation by order dated 06.6.1988 (Annexure-3).

(2.) For the sake of brevity some of the relevant clauses of the Model Voluntary Retirement Scheme, which are necessary for deciding the controversy, are quoted herein below

(3.) After receiving notice a counter affidavit has been filed by the Corporation inter alia taking the stand that due to certain unfortunate incidents the Corporation sustained huge loss and took a decision to downsize the surplus and unproductive labour force. Consequently a notification was issued calling for options from the eligible employees to submit their applications seeking Voluntary Retirement. In reply to such notification 52 employees of the Corporation including the petitioner exercised their option for Voluntary Retirement. The applications were forwarded by opposite party No. 2 to the State Government for consideration. It is further averred that the Government in Public Enterprises Department by its order dated 14.10.2003 intimated the Corporation as well as other Public Sector Undertaking not to implement the Voluntary Retirement Scheme till funds are made available. Consequently there was delay. It is further submitted that after receiving the clearance from the Government, the application filed by the petitioner and others opting for Voluntary Retirement was accepted by order dated 12.1.2006 and the petitioner was intimated that he would retire from service under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme w.e.f. 16.1.2006. The submission of the petitioner that he had submitted an application on 03.3.2004 (Annexure-7) intimating the Corporation authorities that he wants to withdraw his option of Voluntary Retirement is strongly disputed. It is submitted that no such withdrawal application had been received by the Corporation.