KH RASHITOMBI DEVI; PH AMUJAO SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in both the writ applications were working in different capacities in Manipur Handloom and Handicraft Development Corporation Ltd. (MHHDC). They have filed these two writ applications challenging the decision of Government of Manipur in the department of Commerce and Industries in Annexure A/18 to W.P.(C) No. 415 of 2005 denying payment of additional Dearness Allowance (DA) of 38% to those who take voluntary retirement under the scheme as well as the order in Annexure A/23 to the said writ application written by the Managing Director, MHHDC intimating the General Secretary of MHHDC Employees Union that as per the decision taken in Annexure A/18, the employees of the Corporation who have opted for voluntary retirement would not be entitled to 38% additional D.A.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that when the State was under heavy financial constraints and various austerity measures had been taken, a further decision was taken to follow Office Memorandum dated 15.10.1988 of Government of India, Ministry of Industries, Bureau of Public Enterprises in floating a scheme for voluntary retirement of employees of different Government Department/Companies/Corporations. Manipur Spinning Mills Corporation Ltd., a Government Company has submitted a proposal to the State Government for voluntary retirement of it's staff working in the mill. The positive response received from the staff working in the mill, encouraged the State Government to invite similar proposals from other Corporations owned and run by the State.

(3.) On 26.09.2001, a high level meeting of the Government Officers was convened and it was decided that voluntary retirement scheme shall be applicable to those Companies which will be continued but require a more trim and responsive management. For those companies which are to be wound up, steps should be taken up under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for winding up. This was one of the decisions taken in the high level meeting and in pursuance of the above, it was decided to continue MHHDC to function but to down size the staff position and have a responsive management. In view of the above decision, the employees of MHHDC were requested to exercise their option for voluntary retirement in terms of the scheme as stated above. It appears that 108 employees including the petitioners of MHHDC working in different capacities opted for voluntary retirement as per the scheme. Before any decision was taken accepting the voluntary retirement offered by the petitioners and others, a meeting was conducted in presence of the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Manipur on 2nd March, 2002. From Annexure A/5, it appears that while clarifying certain issues, it was observed that pay of employees which was being paid will be reckoned for calculating the requirement of fund. In respect of those companies which continued to follow ROP 1990 shall be paid pay plus D.A. under ROP 1990 as on 1.1.1996 and D.A. of 38%, over and above, as has been laid down in ROP 1999.