High CourtDivision BenchDisposed of all petitions with no costs.

JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION ETC. v. JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. ETC.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 10864 of 1989; Writ Petition No. 13044 of 1984
Neutral Citation:

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court
Hon'ble Judges
  • Ranganath Misra
  • P. B. Sawant
  • K. Ramaswamy
Judgment Date
1990-05-03
Court Decision / Holding
This judgment will govern all the petitions. The petitions, transferred cases and all interlocutory applications, civil miscellaneous petitions and contempt petitions are disposed of accordingly with no costs. The Court directed: (i) the scales of pay and dearness allowance as recommended in the HPC report would be extended to those employees appointed with Central pattern terms; (ii) employees appointed on or after 1 January 1989 would be governed by Government discretion; those appointed earlier with IDA pattern would continue under their appointment terms; (iii) pay revision for those employees would take place only as and when similar changes are effected for Central Government employees, with a voluntary option to switch to the IDA pattern; (iv) the specific effective dates for implementation (e.g., 1.1.1986 for revised slabs/DA, 1.1.1989 for CCA, etc.) will apply, and arrears would be adjusted accordingly.
Final Disposition
Disposed of all petitions with no costs.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION

Respondents

  • JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.
  • ANR.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Kapil Sibal
  • • L. M. Singhvi
  • • Gobinda Mukhoty
  • • K. K. Venugopal
  • • Ms. Mridula Ray
  • • C. V. Subba Rao
  • • P. R. Seetharaman
  • • Ranjit Kumar
  • • Asru Bose
  • • Guiab Chandra
  • • D Sarva Mitter
  • • R. Venkataramani
  • • C. & Mesh
  • • Ms. Urmila Sirur
  • • M. N. Krishnamani
  • • Sunder Rao
  • • K. R. Nagaraja
  • • V. N. Ganpule
  • • J. D. Jain
  • • Chandran

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Kapil Sibal
  • • L. M. Singhvi
  • • Gobinda Mukhoty
  • • K. K. Venugopal
  • • Ms. Mridula Ray
  • • C. V. Subba Rao
  • • P. R. Seetharaman
  • • Ranjit Kumar
  • • Asru Bose
  • • Guiab Chandra
  • • D Sarva Mitter
  • • R. Venkataramani
  • • C. & Mesh
  • • Ms. Urmila Sirur
  • • M. N. Krishnamani
  • • Sunder Rao
  • • K. R. Nagaraja
  • • V. N. Ganpule
  • • J. D. Jain
  • • Chandran

Case Synopsis & Summary

These petitions challenge the Central Government’s decision to shift officers in Class I and II of public sector enterprises to the Industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) pattern and to limit pay revisions. The High Power Pay Committee, appointed by this Court, studied the total emoluments of such officers and submitted its Final Report on 2 November 1988. The Court previously directed interim measures: (i) extend the HPC-recommended pay scales and DA to those appointed under the Central pattern terms and to those already receiving Central DA; (ii) those appointed on or after 1 January 1989 would be governed by Government decisions in its discretion, while earlier appointees on IDA pattern would continue under their existing terms; (iii) pay revision would occur only when similar changes happen for Central Government employees; and (iv) implement the recommendations on dates indicated in the Report. The Government’s delay in acting on the HPC report led to the petitions. The Court heard proposals from the Union and found no major dispute except for House Rent Allowance. It ultimately directed the implementation as per the Report, with specified notional retroactivity for DA/CCA, and allowances (including HRA) to be set out from certain prospective dates. The judgment disposes of all petitions, with no costs, and ensures a unified framework for remuneration in PSUs under the Central pattern or voluntary IDA switch.

Provisions of Law Cited

Article 32 of the Constitution of India

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Equal pay for equal work

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicants argued that the High Power Pay Committee’s findings should be implemented in full for officers in Class I and II PSUs, so that they receive the same pay scales and DA as central government employees, with no discrimination between PSU and central government employees. They sought to continue central pattern pay and DA, ensure equal pay for equal work, secure pay revisions and arrears as per HPC recommendations, and align interim relief with the central framework, while preserving the option to switch to IDA on a voluntary basis where applicable.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that implementation should be phased, with immediate application only to those employed under central pattern with DA, while those appointed after 1 January 1989 would be subject to government discretion. They argued that pay revisions should occur only when central government adopts similar changes and that arrears could be adjusted against ad hoc payments. They also argued about the dates for HRA and other allowances and that some benefits should be conditioned by management decisions of the PSUs.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION ETC. v. JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. ETC. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

A B JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION ETC. _v._ JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. ETC. MAY 3, 1990 [RANGANA1H MISRA, P.B. SAWANT AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.],.. _Labour and Services: Public Sector Enterprises-Class I_ _&_ _II_ _Officers-High Power Pay_ _Committee recommendations-implemen-_ C _tation of_ The High Power Pay Committee appointed under the directions of this Court In respect of the emoluments to be paid to the officers belonging to Class I and Class II Service employed in different public } sector enterprises governed by the Central Government pattern of pay D scales and dearness aUowance, submitted its report on November 2, 1988. When the Central Government did not act expeditiously on that report the petitioners rited writs for a direction to Implement the recommendations. Disposing of the writ petilions, the Court directed: E ' 1. The scales of pay and dearness aUowance as recommended in ~ the report would he extended to those employees who' have been appointed with specific terms and conditions fOr grant of Central D.A. and those who were already being paid Central dearnes'i allowance. [1009G] #### F 2. The employees appointed on or after January 1, 1989 would be governed by such pay-scales and aUowances as might be decided by the -W Government In its discretion. Those appointed earlier with IDA pattern _)_ would continue to be governed in accordance with the terms and condi· tions of their appointment. !too9Hi G 3. The pay re.vision for those employees in respect of whom the H recommendations were being directed to be implemented would take place only as and when similar changes were affected for the Central Government employees. These emp:oyees would, however, continue to enjoy the option to switch over to the IDA pattern of the scales of pay _--J..._ etc. on a voluntary basis. hot OBJ 1006 J.C.I. OFFICERS' ASSCN. _v._ JUTE CORPN. (SAWANT, J.] 1007 4. The various recommendations made In the report wonld he implemented with effect from the dates indicated. [1010C] 5. The arrears arising on account of pay, DA and other allowances etc .• would be adjustable against _ad hoc_ payments made from time to time. [lOUC] ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 10864 of 1989. IN Writ Petition No. 13044 of 1984 Etc. Etc. .{ (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India). A B c _(_ Kapil Sibal, Additional Solicitor General, Dr. L.M. Singhvi, Gobinda Mukhoty, K.K. Venugopal, Ms.·Mridula Ray, C.V. Subba Rao, P.R. Seetharaman, Ranjit Kumar, Asru Bose, Guiab Chandra, D Sarva Mitter, R. Venkataramani, C. &.mesh, Ms. Urmila Sirur, M.N. Krishnamani, Sunder Rao, K.R. Nagaraja, V.N. Ganpule, J.D. Jain and Chandran-Petitioner in person for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SAW ANT, J. In all these cases the relief claimed is the implementation of the recommendations of the High Power Pay Com· mittee in respect of the emoluments to be paid to the officers belong· ing to Class-I and Class-II service employed in different public sector enterprises. E F G H 2. Earlier, these employees had approached various High Courts and this Court against the decision of the Central Government to switch them over to the Industrial Dearness Allowance pattern and the incidental steps taken to enforce the said decision. The main reliefs claimed in those petitions were that (i) the employees should be permitted to continue to draw the salary in the scales of pay applicable to them along with the Central Dearness Allowance, (ii) they should /-. be granted all the benefits of pay revision and revision of other allo wances which may be announced from time to time by the Central Governmerif for its employees, and (iii) there should be. no discrimination between them and those directly· employed by the Central Q()_vc::ml?ent and that they should get the same scales of pay and' 1008 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R. allowances for the same types of jobs in accordance with the principle A \ of "equal pay for equal work". )L- During the course of the hearing, on August 24, 1984, this Court ordered the payment of three additional dearness allowance instalments from August 1, 1983, October 1, 1983 and November 1, 1983 to B those employees who were on Central pattern of pay-scales and dearness allowance subject to an individual undertaking by each employee ~ that in case such payment resulted in the employee receiving an excess, such excess would be recovered from him from future payments, if the petitions failed. c D On February 19, 1986, the Court further ordered that all employees of public sector enterprises following the Central dearness allowance pattern and drawing a basic pay of Rs.1000 or less, will be entitled to interim reliefs on the same basis and scale as the Government of India employees w.e.f. January 1, 1986 .. This was also allowed subject to similar undertaking given by each employee. When the matters were posted for hearing on March 14, 1986, the Central Government expressed its willingness to refer to High Power Pay Committee the question regarding the revision of payscales, additional dearness allowance, compensatory and other allo- ) wances and such other incidental aspects relating to the employees E governed by the Central pattern of pay-scales and dearness allowance. Accordingly, the Court directed the Central Government to constitute a High Power Pay Committee to go into various aspects relating to pay-scales and other incidental matters including interim relief to the said employees, viz., the employees governed by the Central Gove~n­ ment pattern of pay-scales and dearness allowance. The terms of refeF rence of the High Power Pay Committee were as follows: ### ~ _)_ G H "I. **To** **examine the present structure** **of emoluments and** conditions of service taking into account the total packet of benefits in cash and kind, available to the workers, clerical staff, supervisors and officers,. below the Board level following the Central DA pattern and to suggest changes which may be desirable and feasible. II. To examine the variety of allowances and benefits in kind that are presently available to the above noted employees in addition to pay and DA and suggest rationalisation, simplification thereof with a. view to promoting efficiency. J.C.!. OFFICERS' ASSCN. _v._ JUTE CORPN. [SAWANT, J.] 1009 _I_ III. To examine matters relating to grant of interim relief to tl\e employees of all such public entrprises (belonging to the Government of India and following the Central DA pattern) who are drawing basic pay above Rs.1000 per month and grant necessary relief to them, if called for. IV. While making recommendations on the above points, the Committee would keep in view other relatecnactors such as scales of pay, DA and allowances prevailing in other public sector undertakings on Industrial DA formula, economic conditions in the country, resources available at the disposal of these public enterprises". 3. The Committee submitted its recommendations by its Final ~ Report of November 2, 1988. However, the Central Government did - not act on the s.iid report expeditiously and hence the present writ petitions were filed on various dates praying for relief in the form of a direction to the Central Government to implement the recommendations made in the Report. The Government took several adjournments to disclose its stand on the Report and has now ultimately come out with proposals which are incorporated in the additional affidavit dated 17th April, 1990, filed on behalf of the Union of India by Shri Suresh . Kumar, Additional Secretary in the Ministry of Industry, Bureau of _(_ Public Enterprises. The affidavit is taken on record. We heard the parties on the proposals contained in the affidavit A B c D E and found that there was not much controversy over the proposals except in regard to the date of the implementation of the House Rent Allowance. The employees insisted that the said allowance should be given from 1.1.1986 whereas the Government contended that it can properly be implemented only w.e.f. January J, 1989, since the Report · F was of 2nd November, 1988. We, however, direct as follows: (i) The scales of pay and dearness allowance as recommended in the Report will be extended to those employees who have been appointed with specific terms and conditions for grant of Central D.A. This will be equally applicable to the employees who by rules laid down by the public sector enterprises are being paid Central dearness allowance. G (ii) The employees appointed on or after January 1, 1989, will be governed by such pay-scales and allowances as may be decided by the Government in its discretion. Those appointed earlier H 1010 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 119901 2 S.C.R. A with IDA pattern will continue to be governed in accordance . ##### with the terms and conditions of their appointment. \ L_. (iii) The pay revision for those employees in respect of whom the recommendations are hereby being directed to be imple mented hereafter, will take place only as and when similar B changes are effected for the Central Government employees. These employees will, however, continue to enjoy the option to ... switch over to the IDA pattern of the scales of pay etc. on a voluntary basis. (iv) The various recommendations made in the Report will be c implemented with effect from the dates as follows. These dates ~are broadly in conformity with those specified in the Report: ~ Item To be implemented w.e.f. D 1. Revised pay-scales and 1.1.1986 (Para 16.1) revised D.A. formula 2. First instalment of Interim 1.6.1983 (Para 16.3) - . Relief E - J. Second instalment of 1.3.1985 (Para 16.3) Interim Relief Interim Relief 4. CCA as per revised slabs 1.1.1989 (para 11.6 of Chapter 11 (From 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1988 CCA ## 4. CCA as per revised slabs 1.1.1989 (para 11.6 of Chapter 11 (From 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1988 CCA of the Report) will be paid at the existing rate at ###### F .. I notional pay in the revised pay-scales (para 11.7 of the Report) _)_ _5._ _House Rent Allowance_ Ceiling on payment of HRA without Percentage rates as per _ proquction of rent receipt to be SPE's OM NO. 1(3)/83- revised from 1.12.1988. The existing G BPE (WC) dated 1.7.83, HRA structure to be reviewed by subject to overall ceiling BPE and revised norms and rates of Rs. 1250, 1000, 680, fixed from a prospective date ·"'340 and 310 fpr Delhi/ (Ref. Para 11.15) Bombay, A, B 1 and B2, C iind unclassified cities H respectivey J.C.!. OFFICERS' _ASSCN._ _v._ JUTE CORPN. [SAWANT. J.J 1011 Medical facilities in terms of para 11.21 of the Report From prospective date to be decided'by the Management of the PSBs ' 7. Leave Travel Concession -do 8. Other Allowances and per-Tlle quantum of benefits to be quisites as per recommen- decided by the Management of PSEs dations contained in Chap- should be given effect to prosters 12 & 13 of the Report pectively in terms of para !IL 7 Part III of the Report A B (v) The arrears . .arising on account of pay, DA and other allo- c wances etc., would be adjustable against _ad_ hoc.payments made .( from time to time. D _(_ #### # t 4. This judgment will govern all the petitions. The petitions, transferred cases and all iinterlocutory applications, civil miscellaneous petitions and contempt petition are disposed of accordingly with no costs. P.S.S. Petitions disposed of.