- (1.) HEARD Sri Siddhartha Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Sanjeev Singh and Sri Prakash Padia, learned counsel for respon dent No. 1 and Sri Govind Saran, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
(2.) THIS intra Court appeal has been filed by five appellants against the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 8th January, 2008, whereby a bunch of writ petitions (154 in all) have been decided under a common Judgment. Facts in brief relevant for deciding the present special appeal, which arises out of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 56438 of 2007; Sushil Kumar Masi and others v. Life Insurance Corporation of India and others, decided under the same com mon judgment are as follows: The writ petitioners-appellants are employees of Indian Railways at present working under the Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad Division, Northern Railway, Moradabad. The writ petitioners approached this Court by means of the aforesaid writ petition stating therein that they have individually opted for 'salary Saving Scheme' launched by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'lic' ). The scheme is applicable particularly to the salaried class of employees working in Government or Semi Government Organization. The scheme was optional, however, in respect of employees like the petitioners who had exercised the option a definite advantage of rebate of 5% on payment of the premium on the policy amount has been provided for. In terms of the authori zation made by the petitioners-appellants and similarly situate other employees, deductions towards payment of the premium from the salary payable qua the aforesaid 'salary Saving Scheme' was being made by the Railways with specific reference to the provisions of Section 7 (d) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. The premium so deducted from the salary was transmitted by the Railways to the LIC.
(3.) BECAUSE of such deductions petitioners-appellants were availing the ben efit of rebate of 5% on the premium. By means of the order dated 30th April, 2007 followed by the consequential order dated 273rd July, 2007, the Railways decided to not to make such deductions from the salary of the employees towards pre mium payable to the LIC qua Salary Saving Scheme. The net result of such decision of the Railways by which the petitioners feel aggrieved is that petitioners have been disentitled to the benefit of 5% rebate on the premium amount. There fore, they approached this Court for quashing of the aforesaid orders and for a writ of mandamus commanding the Railways to continue the making of deductions from salary towards premium in respect of 'salary Saving Scheme of LIC1. The learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, has held that the issue subject matter of dispute in the present writ petition answers the description of a service matter covered by Section 3 (q) of the Admin istrative Tribunal Act, 1985, in view of Section 14 (d) has to be adjudicated by the Central Administrative Tribunal at the first instance. For arriving at the said con clusion, the learned Single Judge has referred to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and others, AIR 1997 SC 1125, wherein it has been held that an employee covered by the Act, 1985, in respect of service matter, should first approach the Central Administrative Tribunal before invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition has accordingly been dismissed by the learned Single Judge after granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is against this judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 8th January, 2008 that the present special ap peal has been filed.;