HINDUSTAN PHOTO FILM WORKERS WELFARE CENTRE (CITU) Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI
LAWS(MAD)-2017-3-151
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on March 17,2017

Hindustan Photo Film Workers Welfare Centre (Citu) Appellant
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J. - (1.) The petitioners in Writ Petitions, except the petitioner in W.P.No.18608 of 2015, are the employees Union consisting of members, who were/are employees of the second respondent company, the Hindustan Photo Film Manufacturing Company Ltd., (in short HPF). The petitioner in W.P.No.18608 of 2015, is an association consisting of members who are officers, who were/are working in HPF.
(2.) With regard to the prayer sought for by the Writ Petitioners/Employees Union, W.P.No.18566 of 2015, is taken as the lead case. The petitioner therein is a registered trade union and a recognised Union of HPF, a public sector undertaking wholly owned by the Central Government. The petitioner represents 70 workmen out of the total 700 workmen and officers, who are regular employees of the HPF. It is submitted that more than 3800 of the total 4500 employees, have left employment under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) announced by the Management periodically from 1991. The petitioner challenges the Voluntary Retirement Scheme announced by the respondents, dated 20.03.2014 and the circular dated 21.03.2014, as unfair and illegal and seek for consequential reliefs of payment of 72 months salary on the 2007 pay scales to each employee; arrears of pay on 2007 pay scales to each employee; not to deduct income tax on the severance package payable under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme; not to deduct the recoverable monthly advance, Special Performance Allowance and adjustable advance paid to the employees and permit the employees to occupy the staff quarters till 01.05.2016, at the same rate of rent, charged until Voluntary Retirement Schemes. Out of the above consequential directions sought for by the petitioner, the prayer not to deduct the amount of recoverable monthly advance, special performance allowance and adjustable allowance is concerned, the petitioners have been granted the relief sought for by them in another Writ Petition filed by the petitioner herein and other workers Union in W.P.Nos.24460, 24355 and 25491 of 2013, dated 29.11.2016. By the said order, the circulars issued by the HPF, dated 10.07.2013 and 01.07.2013, whereby the monies paid in the form of allowances were sought to be adjusted against the terminal benefits were quashed. Thus, in these Writ Petitions, the petitioners seek to challenge the VRS and the consequential circular issued by the HPF and seek for payment of 72 months salary instead of 60 months salary, as proposed in the VRS scheme, not to deduct income tax on the amount payable to them and till the VRS is accepted and not to evict them from the quarters.
(3.) HPF, a wholly owned company of the Central Government, which at one point of time enjoyed a monopoly market in the manufacture of x-ray film appears to have crumbled in its own weight and suffered continuous loss and was declared as a sick industry under Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985, pursuant to a reference filed before the BIFR during October 1995. Attempts to revive the company had failed and BIFR recommended for winding up of the company, as against such order, the second respondent as well as the workmen preferred appeals before the AAIFR and the appeals filed by the workmen were dismissed as a certified copy of the order passed by the BIFR was not annexed. Challenging the order of the BIFR, W.P.No.24417 of 2005 was filed, which was tagged along with W.P. No.19640 of 2005, filed by the Film Factories Workers Union. The order passed by the BIFR was stayed by order dated 29.07.2005. The said Writ Petitions were dismissed by common order dated 29.08.2016, accepting the recommendations of the BIFR to wind up the second respondent company. It was made clear that the dismissal of the Writ Petitions will not come in the way of the petitioners articulating their grievances in the remaining Writ Petitions (present batch of cases) and Contempt Petition.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.