M.Katju, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed against the impugned orders dated 16.6.2000, 22.9.2002, Annexure 4 and 9 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus restraining the respondents from shifting the agency of the petitioner subsequent to the impugned order. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) It is alleged in para 2 of the petition that on 30.11.99 the petitioner was appointed as agent of the respondent Life Insurance Corporation. She was attached to Sri S.K. Jain Development Officer. It is alleged that the petitioner's performance was outstanding. The appointment of an agent of the L.I.C. is governed by the Agents/Regulation 1972 framed under Section 49 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act. Under Regulation 5, all appointments are to be made by the competent authority specified in the Schedule to the Regulations. For the purpose of appointment of agents, the Branch Manager is the competent authority. So far as appointment of an agent with a particular Development Officer is concerned the matter is governed by the circulars issued by the Life Insurance Corporation from time to time. Under the circular dated 20.1.92 Annexure 1 to the petition an agent may be attached only when the new business sum assured (in short called the NBSA) is below the criterion laid down. It is alleged that person does not fall in the aforesaid criteria, he/she cannot be attached/detached. It is alleged in para 7 of the petition that the petitioner has given a remarkable business of about 60 lacs and insured 26 lives in only seven months and hence she cannot be detached or attached. The circular letter dated 20.1.92 has been clarified by circular dated 23.6.92 which is more elaborate, specific and clear. It modifies para 3(e) to tone down the limit of NBSA. The limit of NBSA has been reduced to 7.5 lacs or 25 lives insured between 5-7 agency years. Clause 4 requires consent of the agent prior to allotment Clause 5 provides that agents cannot be allotted if his/her performance exceeds the NBSA as well as number of lives stipulated therein. If either of the two limits is exceeded, the agent becomes unallotable. True copy of 'the circular letter dated 23.6.92 is Annexure 2. Thereafter another circular was issued on 5.1.93 vide Annexure 3. It hiked the NBSA from 7.5 lacs to 10 lacs. However, the duration was reduced from 5-7 years to 3 years. It is alleged in para 12 of the petition the petitioner cannot be said to be covered by it, in so far as the matter of attachment/detachment is concerned. Her NBSA was much more than the limit specified in regard to the sum or number of lives insured. Hence it is alleged that the impugned order is illegal. It is alleged that the agency of the petitioner has been detached from Sri S.K. Jain and shifted by order dated 16.6.2000 vide Annexure 4. The petitioner made representation against that order on 12.7.2000 vide Annexure 5 but to no avail. Another representation dated 24.8.2000 is Annexure 6 and reminders are Annexures 7 and 8. The petitioner received letter of Manager (Sales) dated 22.9.2000 stating that the impugned order was passed in accordance with the relevant rules and cannot be reviewed or revised. True copy of the letter dated 22.9.2000 is Annexure 9. The petitioner made representations to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority vide Annexures 10 and 11 but to no avail. It is alleged in para 22 of the petition that before attaching the petitioner with Shri Bhatia her consent was never obtained. It is further alleged that the petitioner's performance being outstanding she cannot be attached/detached. It is alleged in para 28 of the petition that the petitioner was working with S.K. Jain and under his guidance she was able to give a business of Rs. 60 lacs within seven months. It is alleged in para 29 that the petitioner does not wish to be associated with Shri Bhatia for certain personal reason. In fact the entire business has come to a grinding halt.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the Life Insurance Corporation. We have perused the same. In para 4 it is stated that Shri S.K. Garg was granted agency by the Life Insurance Corporation in 1992 under the organization of Shri A.K. Bhatia Development Officer. Since the grant of agency Shri S.K. Garg is under the organization of Shri A.K. Bhatia till today. He is not a direct agent. In para 6 it is stated that A.B.M. Sales interviewed the petitioner at the time of processing of the agency application. However the petitioner neither at the time of interview nor at the time of granting the agency ever disclosed the fact that she was going to be married with Shri S.K. Jain. The Corporation's Central Office, Bombay on 26.12.1975 had issued a circular pertaining to the appointment of agent and disclosure of relationship with the employees of the Corporation, its medical examiners and agents by the applicants for agency. The decision of the competent authority for continuance of this agency should be obtained otherwise such agent would be deemed to have committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the Corporation and his/her agency would be liable to be terminated.;