- (1.) SINCE a common question of law arises in all the writ petitions, the writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) HEARD the counsel for both the parties and perused the documents on record. The petitioners opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2002. They claim compensation in terms of Clause 4(G)(ii) of the Scheme. However, the claim of the petitioners was sought to be denied on the basis of the provision contained in Clause 4(H)(i) and therefore, several other similarly situated persons approached this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4125 of 2004 and Batch of cases. The writ petitions were allowed by order dated 09.05.2006 and the Letters Patent Appeal preferred by M/s. Bharat Refractories Limited (since then merged with SAIL) was dismissed by order dated 17.03.2010. The matter was taken in Special Leave Petition being SLP (Civil) ....../ 2010 (CC No. 14360 of 2010) and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed by order dated 20.09.2010. The petitioners in the present batch of cases have approached this Court in the year, 2012.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that in terms of Clause 4(G) (ii), the petitioners are entitled for grant of compensation and for salary for 60 months. Relying on the order passed by this Court in the earlier proceeding, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that other similarly situated persons have been granted similar benefits and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for grant of benefit under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2002 in terms of Clause 4(G)(ii) read with 4(H)(i).;