PADMINI RAJASEKARAN Vs. INDIAN AIRLINES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition has been filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the letter of the fourth respondent dated 26-09-1994 bearing No. HP DO1./C.2501, but signed on 19-10-1994 and quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to accept the petitioner's voluntary retirement under the revised voluntary retirement scheme dated 7-10-1994.

(2.) The controversy arises in this Writ Petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to go on voluntary retirement under revised Voluntary Retirement Scheme, as per her request dated 15-10-1994, introduced by the respondent Corporation on 7-10-1994, which Scheme came into force on 10-10-1994 and was in force till 31-12-1994. The petitioner was inducted into the service of the respondents in the year 1964. After completing 53 years of service, by her letter dated 4/17-8-1994 she applied for voluntary retirement. The said application is presumably made under Regulation 12 of Indian Airlines Employees' Service Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which enabled them to opt for voluntary retirement on attaining the age of 55 years or on completion of 20 years of continuous service. When the said request was under consideration, the respondents Airlines introduced a revised Scheme for voluntary retirement on 7-10-1994. Pursuant to the said revised Scheme the petitioner again applied on 15-10-1994 to consider her for voluntary retirement under the revised Scheme. However, by the impugned order dated 26-09-1994, signed on 19-10-1994 the request of the petitioner was considered as per her application dated 4/17-8-1994. The said order is challenged in this Writ Petition.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner as argued by Mr.R. Thiagarajan, the learned Senior Counsel is that even when the petitioner applied on 4/17-8-1994 opting for voluntary retirement, she has specifically stated that she has been keeping little indifferent health and due to domestic reasons she would like to offer voluntary retirement from service with effect from 1-2-1995 and also reserving the right to opt for voluntary retirement in case any new Scheme is introduced in the meantime. When the said application was pending, in fact, a new Scheme was introduced with effect from 10-10-1994 and therefore, the petitioner by letter dated 15-10-1994 expressed her willingness for voluntary retirement under the revised Scheme. Without considering the said request, the petitioner has been voluntarily retired by the impugned order on the basis of her request made in her application dated 4/17-8-1994. On the date when the order was signed, namely 19-10-1994 the revised Scheme has come into force and therefore, in all probability the request of the petitioner for voluntary retirement ought to have been considered under the revised Scheme.