RANA RANJIT SINGH Vs. HINDUSTAN STEELWORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties - Hindustan Steelworks Construction Ltd., a Govt. of India Undertaking (hereinafter called 'the Company') and its Group General Manager at Duburi - to allow the petitioner to go on voluntary retirement under the voluntary Retirement Scheme introduced by the company, as per the petitioner's application dated 25.8.2000 (Annexure -2) and to grant the consequential benefits under the said Scheme.

(2.) THE petitioner's case, in brief, is that he is an employee of the Company and is at present posted as the Senior Manager in its Unit at Duburi in the district of Jajpur. The opposite party -company came up with a circular dated 10.8.2000 (Annexure -1) by which it extended the Voluntary Retirement Scheme for a further period upto 30.9.2000 and invited applications from its employees opting for the benefits under the Scheme. Pursuant to the aforesaid circular in Annexure -1, the petitioner made an application on 25.8.2000 requesting the Company to allow him to go on voluntary retirement in terms of the Scheme and to release him with effect from 31.10.2000. According to the petitioner, though his application was received by the Company on 28.8.2000, the Company did not take any decision on the said application. On or about 14.12.2000 the Company issued another circular to all its Zonal/Unit Heads wherein it was indicated that the applications seeking release beyond 30.11.2000 would be rejected. The relevant portion of the aforesaid circular in Annexure -3 reads as follows ;

(3.) BE that as it may, it is not disputed by the opposite parties that the petitioner had applied for voluntary retirement pursuant to the Company's circular dated 10.8.2000 (Annexure -1) within the stipulated period and requested for its acceptance with effect from 31.10.2000, but due to assignment of some urgent work to him by the management and in the interest of the Company, the Company delayed the date of acceptance till 31.12.2000. Therefore, there was no fault on the part of the petitioner in applying for the same. It is also not disputed that similarly situated employees were allowed to avail the benefits under the aforesaid V.R. Scheme. In this regard learned counsel for the petitioner referring to a decision of the Apex Court in Manjushree Pathak v. The Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. , submitted that though the management of the Company has the discretion to accept or reject the request of an employee for voluntary retirement, but that cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner as has been done in the case of the present petitioner. In the case referred to above, it was held :