- (1.) WE have heard Sri A. K. Malviya, learned Counsel for the petitioner and sri Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 18. 11. 2004, passed by respondent No. 2 and orders dated 21. 4. 2004 and 24. 7. 2004, passed by respondent no. 3 respectively, by which, his membership of Chairman's Club has been withdrawn on the ground that he had performed business of less than Rs. 25 lacs in the financial year 2001-2002. He has also been directed by the respondents to refund fringe benefits availed by him in the financial year 2002-2003.
(3.) IT is pertinent to mention here that while acting as Agent in the Life insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation), the petitioner performed business of Rs. 1,34,86,000/- in the financial year 2000-2001 and on the basis of said performance, he was granted membership of chairman's Club (hereinafter referred to as Club ). He availed the facilities of club. In the subsequent year 2001-2002, it was detected that 140 policies had lapsed and there was loss of income amounting to Rs. 69,35,000/- to the corporation. In the year 2001-2002, the petitioner performed business of rs. 89,05,000/ -. The said loss amounting to Rs. 69,35,000/ was deducted from the total business of Rs. 89,05,000/ -. Thus, total insurance amount earned by the corporation was Rs. 19,70,000/ -. The petitioner also availed benefits of Club in the year 2002-2003, whereas total business performed by him in the said year was Rs. 14. 99 lacs. The requirement for membership of Club was minimum business of Rs. 25 lacs, therefore, membership of the petitioner for the year 2001-2002 was withdrawn and the benefits availed by him in the year 2002-2003 were directed to be refunded by him. The main contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that only Rs. 15 lacs per year was required for membership of club and the office of the Corporation had communicated him the business performed by him accordingly. He has further contended that since the petitioner had performed business of more than Rs. 15 lacs in said financial year, therefore, his membership of Club could not be withdrawn. As against this, learned counsel for the Corporation has contended that the minimum business of Rs. 25 lacs per year was required for membership of Club and it was not Rs. 15 lacs as contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner. He has filed Annexure-1 to the counter affidavit, which is circular letter dated 30. 6. 2001, showing that business of Rs. 25 lacs was required for membership of Club. Para 7 of the circular letter dated 30. 6. 2001 is quoted below:-7. Fulfilment of Minimum Net Business during years of failure.-Anagent aspiring to enter into or continue membership of any club must bring in the following net minimum business in the year of failure and keep the agency in force. This will be operative from Financial Year 2001-2002. _____ chairman's Club zm's Club dm's Club bm's Club 25 lacs 15 lacs 10 lacs 5 lacs the provision of 25% concession for aged Club Member Agents as stated in para 3 above is meant only in respect of basic criteria for continuation of membership under Condition A and B only and it is not meant to be granted to the eligible members in the prescribed 'minimum Net Business' viz Rs. 25 lacs, Rs. 15 lacs, Rs. 10 lacs and Rs. 5 lacs for Chairman's, Zonal Manager's, divisional Manager's and Branch Manager's Clubs respectively. They will have to comply with the requirement of 'minimum Net Business' in full on par with other agents. ";