2023 (8) TMI 1482 - SCH - Income Tax

Benefits of Leave Travel Concession/Home Travel Concession to any employee of the Bank visiting foreign destinations enroute - Scope of implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission - Additional Solicitor General submits that pursuant to the issuance of Circular dated 07th April, 2014 by Indian Bank s Association and Circular dated 15th April, 2014 issued by the petitioner-bank, except where orders have been passed by the Court, the management of the petitioner-bank has not extended the benefits of Leave Travel Concession/Home Travel Concession to any employee of the Bank visiting foreign destinations enroute. HELD THAT - Issue notice.Advocate on Record, who is on caveat, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Counter affidavit shall be filed within four weeks.Rejoinder affidavit shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. Learned counsel for the petitioner-bank shall file an affidavit explaining reasons for non-implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission from the year 2008 to 2014. Till further orders, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. However, the petitioner-bank shall not make any recoveries from its employees during the pendency of the present petition. List after pleadings are complete.

Summary

Issues:
1. Implementation of Leave Travel Concession/Home Travel Concession benefits to employees visiting foreign destinations enroute.
2. Non-implementation of recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission from 2008 to 2014.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the issue of the petitioner-bank's failure to extend Leave Travel Concession/Home Travel Concession benefits to employees visiting foreign destinations enroute, as highlighted in Circulars dated April 7, 2014, and April 15, 2014. The Additional Solicitor General informed the court about the non-extension of these benefits by the bank management, except in cases where court orders were in place. The court issued notice on the matter, with the Advocate on Record for the respondents accepting the notice. The court directed the filing of a counter affidavit within four weeks, followed by a rejoinder affidavit within two weeks. Additionally, the petitioner-bank was instructed to submit an affidavit explaining the reasons for not implementing the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations from 2008 to 2014.

2. Regarding the non-implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations during the specified period, the court ordered that the operation of the impugned judgment would remain stayed until further notice. However, the petitioner-bank was prohibited from making any recoveries from its employees during the pendency of the petition. The court scheduled the case for listing after the completion of the pleadings, indicating a comprehensive review of the issues involved and the need for further submissions before a final decision is reached.