CHARANJIT SINGH SAINI Vs. STATE THROUGH INDUSTRIES DEPTT.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these intra Court appeals, the appellants have assailed the validity of the order dtd. 29/9/2009 passed by the learned single judge by which the writ petitions preferred by the respondent have been allowed and the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal has been set aside. In order to appreciate the issues involved in this writ appeal, we set out the facts which are stated infra.

(2.) The respondent is a company registered with the Registrar of Companies under the Company's Act 1956. The respondent introduced Voluntary Separation Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'the scheme') from time to time giving option of voluntary retirement to its workers on the terms and conditions indicated in the scheme. It is the case of the respondent that the employees were given the option under the scheme in pursuance of which 40, 15, 18, 66, 53 and 17 employees opted under the scheme for voluntary retirement in the year 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995, respectively, as each year, benefits under the scheme were different depending upon the prevailing pay scales and all the aforesaid employees voluntarily availed all the respective schemes and signed the documents including the resignation letter, memorandum of settlement under Sec. 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') which clearly specified that the amount shall be paid in two instalments, letters sent to Deputy Labour Commissioner for registration of settlement, duly executed receipts and declaration of non-employment. The aforesaid employees received all the amounts due under the respective schemes as well as their terminal benefits after fulfilling the necessary formalities. On 17/5/1996, 235 employees opted for voluntary retirement under the scheme pursuant to which they were paid the enhanced amount as the salaries of the employees had increased in the year 1996. The employees who had opted for voluntary retirement in the year 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995 were given lesser monetary benefits than the employees who had opted voluntary retirement in the year 1996. Being aggrieved, they approached the Conciliation Officer, Jammu. The Conciliation Officer forwarded the matter to the State Government seeking reference to the Labour Court. The State Government, however, refused to refer the dispute to the Labour Court. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed a writ petition namely OWP No.938/1998.

(3.) The aforesaid writ petition was allowed by the Learned Single Judge vide order dtd. 4/2/1999 and the State Government was directed to make reference in terms of Sec. 10 of the Act within a period of two months. In compliance of the order passed by this Court, the State Government on 18/6/1999 vide SRO 236 made a reference, which is reproduced below for the facility of reference: