Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri I.S. Tomar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Satish Chandra Dubey holding brief of Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3, in this Bunch of writ petition.
(2.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondent Spinning Mills is a Government Company. It was declared sick. Closure of the Mau Nath Bhanjan Unit of the aforesaid Spinning Mill was declared w.e.f. 30.10.2005 under Section 6(w) of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act 1947. By Government Order No.914/77-1-2006-40 (T)2004 dated 31.3.2006 as corrected buy Government Order No.1062/77-1-2005-40(T)/2004 dated 19.4.2006 funds were provided for payment to workmen of the Unit under the Voluntarily Retirement Scheme (V.R.S.) providing cut off date as 30.10.2005. A notice dated 19.4.2006 was issued by the Company inviting options from the ex-employees working at the Unit for getting their payment under V.R.S. and payment of Retrenchment compensation to 'Badali' workers under the Provisions of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act 1947. Perusal of the copy of the notice filed as Annexure 4 to the writ petition shows that it specifically discloses the amount which shall be payable to employees of the company, which includes V.R.S. amount, gratuity and leave encashment etc. Some of the petitioners opted for V.R.S. in terms of the notice whereas the other petitioners have not opted. The impugned orders were passed on the representation of the petitioners. Relevant portion of one such impugned order dated 24.8.2013 in the matter of petitioner no.1 of the leading writ petition no.1090 of 2014 is reproduced below: "Sri Sudama Yadav S/o Sri Bodh Raj Yadav was engaged at Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company as a regular/permanent worker. He has a regular/permanent employee of Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company and was working as Winder. The closure of Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company was declared with effect from 30.10.2005 under Section-6(W) of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 as a result of which the services of all the employees working in the said Unit had come to an end. The Govt. of U.P. vide G.O. No.914/77-1-2006-40(T)/2004 dated 31st March, 2006 provided funds for payment of amount of Voluntarily Retirement Scheme to the ex-regular/permanent employees of Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company with the condition that the said amount be used within a period of 03 months. Accordingly, after closure of the Maunath Bhanjan Unit, the Company issued a notice dated 19.04.2006 inviting options from the ex-employees working at the Unit for getting their payment under Voluntarily Retirement Scheme of the U.P. State Government and payment of Retrenchment Compensation under the provisions of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. U.P. State Spinning Company Limited was declared "Sick" by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) vide Order dated 21.12.1992 under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA) and Modified Draft Rehabilitation Scheme (MDRS) as approved by the State Government vide Order No.MS-425/77-1-2010-34(Mis)/99 dated 21.10.2010 has been submitted to the BIFR through the Operating Agency (IFCI) and at present the same is pending before BIFR for consideration. In the said MDRS, a provision has been made to give VRS/Retrenchment Compensation, as the case may be, to all the ex-employees of the Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company. Accordingly, the Company vide its letter dated 16.11.2010 requested the U.P. State Government to provide more funds for distributing the amount of VRS and Retrenchment Compensation as the case may be to the remaining ex-employees/workers of the Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company. Subsequent thereto the Government of U.P. vide G.O.No.3187/77-1-2010-40(T)/2004 dated 01.02.2011 provided more funds for distributing the amount of VRS to the remaining employees of Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company with the condition that the said amount be used within a period of 03 months. Consequent to the aforesaid G.O. dated 01.02.2011, the Company again pasted notices on 09.02.2011, 14.03.2011, 11.04.2011, 13.05.2011, 26.07.2011 & 27.08.2011 on the Notice-Board of the Maunath Bhanjan Unit of the Company calling upon the remaining ex-employees of Maunath Bhanjan unit of the Company to submit their options for obtaining the amount of VRS under U.P. State Government Scheme and Retrenchment Compensation under the provisions of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. Besides the above, the Company also published the Notices in the News-Papers i.e. Dainik Jagran, Gorakhpur edition on 24.04.2011, Dainik Jagran Varanasi Edition on 24.04.2011 and Hindustan Gorakhpur Edition on 22.05.2011, Hindustan Gorakhpur Edition o 24.07.2011 and Hindustan Varanasi Edition on 4.09.2011 inviting options for VRS/Retrenchment Compensation as the case may be from the Employees of the Company immediately, failing which the amount of VRS will be returned to the State Government. Thus, the Company has made vigorous efforts in calling upon the employees of Maunth Bhanjan to submit their options for obtaining the amount of VRS or Retrenchment Compensation as the case may be. Sri Sudama Yadav had not submitted his option form for obtaining the amount of VRS. Accordingly, as per terms of the G.O. No. an amount of Rs.1,36,469.00 was calculated towards the amount payable under VRS, Gratuity, Leave etc. to Sri Sudama Yadav and the said amount could not be sent to him due to the reason that he had not submitted his option form for taking the amount under V.R.S. The amount which was provided by U.P. State Government for distribution of the amount of VRS vide G.O. dated 01.02.2011 was to be used within 03 months. However, the Company vide letter dated 23.07.2011 requested the Government to extend time upto 30.09.2011 and thereafter again vide letter dated 15.09.2011 sought time upto 31.12.2011 and ultimately the amount which was left with the Company towards VRS/Retrenchment Compensation was returned to the State Government on 27.02.2013 and 31.03.2013 and at present no funds are available with the Company for distribution of the amount of VRS to the remaining ex-employees of Maunath Bhanjan Unit including Sri Sudama Yadav. In case Sri Sudama Yadav gives his consent/option for accepting the amount of VRS as offered to him as per Rules, the Company will request the State Government to provide the necessary funds so that the admissible amount be paid to him. It has also been alleged by Sri Sudama Yadav in his representation that he was not aware about the basis on which the amount of VRS has been calculated. The Government of U.P. vide G.O. No.288/PRC/44-1/93-85/90 dated 08.06.1993 has mentioned the method of calculation of VRS according to which in case of a regular worker one and half months wages for every year of completed service is payable as an amount of VRS. The said method of calculation was specifically mentioned in the Notice dated 09.02.2011 keeping in view the cut of date as 30.10.2005 fixed by the U.P. State Government. There is no provision regarding payment of interest on the amount of VRS in the Rules. The petitioner, in his representation, has alleged that the amount of Voluntarily Retirement Scheme which is being offered to him by Maunath Bhanjan Unit is less than the amount which was being paid by U.P. Co-Operative Spinning Mills Federation Limited to the employees of its five Units namely Amroha, Baheri, Mau Aima, Bahadurganaj, (Ghazipur) and Fatehpur. In fact, the amount VRS payable to Sri Sudama Yadav was calculated as per prevailing government orders as mentioned herein above. I do not find any substance in the representation of Sri Sudama Yadav. However, in case Sri Sudama Yadav gives his consent for accepting the amount of VRS already offered to him, a request will be made to the State Government for providing the necessary funds for payment of the amount of VRS amount to the remaining ex-employees of Maunath Bhanjan Unit including Sri Sudama Yadav. The representation of Sri Sudama Yadav is being disposed off accordingly."
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners of writ petition No.1090 of 2014, 14479 of 2014, 1147 of 2014, 1057 of 2014 and 25045 of 2015 were permanent employees of the respondent Company whereas petitioners of the remaining writ petitions were Badli employees.;