RABINARAYAN DAS Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all the above mentioned three writ petitions, the petitioners, who are the employees of Orissa Mining Corporation Limited, have claimed to extend the pension scheme at par with the employees of similarly situated Public Sector Undertakings. Therefore, these writ petitions have been heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment. For just and proper adjudication of the matter, the facts of W.P.(C) No.1018 of 2014 have been taken into consideration.

(2.) The Orissa Mining Corporation Limited (for short "OMC Ltd") is a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) being controlled, managed and financed by the State Government. The petitioners, who were appointed to different posts of the OMC Ltd, have retired from services, after rendering continuous and uninterrupted services, on attaining the age of superannuation. While they were in service, the Board of Directors of OMC Ltd in its 268th meeting dated 25.03.1989 decided in principle on the proposal for introduction of pension scheme for the employees of the Corporation at par with the benefit extended to the State Government employees with effect from 01.04.1989. A committee was accordingly constituted comprising of Chairman, Managing Director; Joint Secretary, Finance, Govt. of Orissa; and Secretary & Financial Advisor, OMC Ltd to examine and submit a report in the matter of introduction of pension scheme for the employees of the OMC Ltd so as to take a decision by the OMC Ltd. A report was accordingly prepared and placed before the Board of Directors in its 282nd meeting dated 25.06.1991, who, on consideration of the same, unanimously resolved to approve the introduction of pension scheme for the employees of the OMC Ltd. Consequentially, a memorandum was prepared to obtain approval of the State Government and the Central Provident Fund Commissioner before implementation of such scheme. The said decision of the Board of Directors, on being forwarded, was approved by the State Government, after due consideration. Accordingly, on 05.10.1991, Under Secretary to the Government in the Department of Steel and Mines addressed a letter to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, OMC Ltd indicating therein that the proposal for introduction of pension scheme for the employees of the OMC Ltd was approved by the Government with due concurrence of the Finance Department, w.e.f. 01.04.1989 subject to modification to the effect that the age of superannuation of the employees of the Corporation shall be 58 years except in case of Class-IV employees where it is 60 years.

(3.) Mr. B. Routray, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. S.K. Samal, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.1018 of 2014 contended that denial of pension to the employees of the OMC Ltd, vide order dated 28.04.2014 in Annexure-9, which was passed in response to letter dated 09.04.2013 issued by the Chief Managing Director, OMC Ltd, is not only arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of law, but also discriminatory, and such order has been issued by opposite party no.2 without modifying, revoking or superseding the Government approval accorded vide letter No.12610 dated 05.10.1991, as well as the Public Enterprises Department, Government of Orissa Resolution no. 3169 dated 16.08.1995 notified in the official gazette. Thereby, the order impugned cannot sustain in the eye of law and is liable to be quashed and the petitioners are entitled to pensionary benefit as was approved by the Government with due concurrence of the Finance Department.