RETIRED EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, SDCC BANK LTD Vs. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BHUBANESWAR & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner above named, therefore, most humbly prays the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this case, issue Rule Nisi to the Opp. Parties calling upon them to show cause as to why;

(2.) Advancing his submission Shri Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an Association of the retired employees consisting of 81 members registered under the Societies Registration Act bearing Registration No.2907/62 of 2009-10 espousing the cause of the retired employees of Sambalpur District Cooperative Bank Ltd., who have retired after 31.12.2005. The petitioner-Association challenges the administrative decision allowing the employees continuing in the Bank the revised scale of pay from 1.07.2009 instead of 1.01.2006, taking into account the date the Orissa State Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 2008, hereinafter in short, called as "ORSP Rules, 2008" came into force. The members of the association have all retired in between 1.01.2006 to 30.06.2009. Referring to the service rules, Shri S.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the pay scale of the employees of the Bank has been revised from time to time with every revision in pay scales of the employees of the State of Odisha. The Revised Scale of Pay was implemented by the Government of Odisha w.e.f.1.01.2006 on the line of the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission. It is contended that after the revision of the pay scale of the employees of the Government of Odisha had taken place, different District Central Cooperative Banks furnished proposal for revision of scale of pay of their employees as based on the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission to the Registrar Cooperative Society Orissa who is empowered with the power of approval in exercise of power U/s.33- A(2) of the OCS Act, 1962. Taking this Court to the provisions in the Rules as enumerated in page 3 & 4 of the writ petition, Shri Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the decision of the management to apply the revised scale of pay Rules, 2008 from 1.07.2009 instead of 1.01.2006 is contrary to the provision of law. It is further contended that while allowing the revised scale of pay to the employees in the employment from 01.01.2006, grant of such benefit to the retired employees in between 1.1.2006 to 30.06.2009 w.e.f. 1.07.2009 becomes discriminatory. Shri Nanda, further submitted that even though the management is authorized to take into account different aspects involving grant of revision scale of pay but there has been no proper consideration of the aspect involved therein by the Management of the Bank. Taking this Court to the averments on the business of the bank as detailed in paragraph no.10 of the writ petition, Shri Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there has been no proper consideration of the aspect involved herein by the Management. Shri S.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that even though the benefit of Revised Scale of Pay Rules 2008 has been granted to similarly situated persons to different District Central Cooperative Banks w.e.f. 1.1.2006, non-grant of such benefit to the retired employees of this particular Bank amounts to discrimination involving similarly situated persons. For the instance, the petitioner has taken the case of Bolangir District Central Cooperative Bank and submitted that for the grant of benefit to similarly situated employees from 1.01.2006 by other District Central Cooperative Banks, there is no lawful reason in depriving the retired employees involving the petitioner-association. It is further contended that involving the grievance the retired employees though submitted a representation on 4.11.2009 but the management remained silent. It is also alleged that even though the petitioner-association submitted representation to the Registrar Cooperative Society on 25.06.2010 the Registrar has no response to the same as of now. Several reminders at the instance of the association have also not been responded. On an application under the R.T.I Act, the petitioners have been intimated that their claim for application of Orissa Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 2008 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 is under consideration and the decision of the management is to be communicated to them at appropriate time.

(3.) Shri S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the Bank, on the other hand, taking this Court to the counter averments of the opposite party no.2 submitted that the writ petition having been filed by the association of the retired employees, in absence of detail particulars of the retired employees, is not maintainable. Further, taking this Court to the other grounds and particularly referring to the provision at Section 33-A(2) of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962, Shri S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the Bank, contended that there is no suo motu application of recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission and the Registrar, Cooperative Society has to take a decision in such matter in exercise of his power under Section 33-A(2) of the Act, 1962. To strengthen his submission, Shri S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the Bank cited two decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court, first in the case of Gadde Venkateswar Rao Vs. Government of Anadhra Pradesh & others, 1966 AIR(SC) 828 and in the case of Vinoy Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2001 AIR(SC) 1739 and submitted that the petitioner-association has no locus standi to take up such issue in filing this writ petition. Shri S.C. Dash, learned counsel further submitted that the Sambalpur District Central Cooperative Bank is a Cooperative Credit Society registered under the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 and is a body corporate within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act, but is now owned, controlled and substantially financed by the State. It has its own bye-law and Staff Service Rules framed U/s.-33-A of the Act. In the Notification dated 24.12.2008 of the Finance Department involving the Orissa Revised Scale of pay Rules, 2008, no doubt it has been stipulated that the Rule shall be deemed to have come into force from 1.01.2006 but it shall only apply to the whole-time employees in employment of the Government and not applicable to the persons, who are not in whole-time employment under the Government of Orissa. In the above premises, Shri S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the Bank contended that the employees under the petitioner-association being not in the whole-time employment in the State of Odisha, the benefit of Rules, 2008 is not applicable to such employees in its full term. Further, for the provision contained in Section 33-A(2) of the Act, 1962 requiring consideration of the application of revision of scale of pay keeping in view the financial position of the Bank, the Committee of the Management is ultimately required to take decision in such matters. Further, responding to the claim of Shri S.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner that there is discrimination involving the retired employees of the Sambalpur District Central Cooperative Bank, as there has been extension of ORSP Rules, 2008, it is contended that benefit to the employees of the other Bank w.e.f. 01.01.2006 is always dependant on the financial capacity of the Bank involved. It is, thus contended that one Bank granting such benefit to its retired employees w.e.f.1.01.2006 has nothing to do with the grant of such benefit to similarly situated persons in another Bank which is altogether a separate entity and decision in such Bank is dependant on the financial position involving such Bank.