9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment elsewhere." 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh thereafter considered the modalities of placement of 1,486 employees of the company and a Cabinet Sub-Committee was constituted which considered the recommendations made by a High Power Committee and the operating agency appointed by BIFR. The Managing Director, HAL, was asked to identify the 1,486 employees and allot them to the various heads of the departments as indicated in Annexure II thereto as an interim measure to be effective from 1-4-1993. The placement of individuals was to be decided by the Committee of Officers constituted under order dated 31-3-1993. It was also stated that separate orders will be issued creating supernumerary posts for these employees. 3. Thereafter, the Government accepted recommendations of the Committee of Officers creating supernumerary posts in the Government departments requiring the heads of departments to maintain a separate muster roll and acquittance register for the individuals allotted to them. The heads of departments were asked to issue temporary posting orders, which shall be in operation till final orders of allotment were issued in pursuance of decisions of the Empowered Committe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory dues. 5. An Ordinance was promulgated which came into effect from 30-11-1996 prohibiting absorption of employees of State public sector undertakings in the Government service and cancelling all orders of the Government appointing any employee of the State public sector undertakings to any post in a public service on the ground that the undertaking had become sick or was likely to become sick or was closed or was likely to be closed. The Ordinance was replaced by the Andhra Pradesh Absorption of Employees of State Government Public Sector Undertakings into Public Service Act, 1997. 6. The validity of the Ordinance and the Act was challenged in a batch of writ petitions before the High Court. A Full Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the impugned G.O., while declaring that the impugned Ordinance or the Act will not affect the rights of the parties as protected under the BIFR scheme. The High Court found that the surplus employees of the HAL were already absorbed and they are the employees of the State alone and, therefore, the impugned Act or the Ordinance cannot affect their rights. The High Court also found that the BIFR scheme could not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vocate, appearing for the appellants, contended as follows : 1. Section 32 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SICA') cannot override the provisions of the A.P. Prohibition of Absorption of Employees of State Government Public Sector Undertakings into Public Service Act, 1997, which, in pith and substance, is a law falling within the scope of entry 41 of List II of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, i.e., 'State Public Services'. The overriding effect given by section 32 of the SICA is limited to laws made by Parliament with respect to the items enumerated in Lists I and III and it cannot extend to laws enacted by the State Legislature with respect to any matter in List II. The finding of the High Court to the contrary is erroneous and unsustainable. 2. Para 9(c) of the BIFR scheme has to be read subject to section 18(1)(da) of the SICA. Therefore, the scheme cannot be understood to require the Government to permanently absorb the surplus staff in question contrary to the statutory provisions governing recruitment to public services of the State. 3. The State Government did not make any firm commitment to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of Kerala [1974] 1 SCR 515; K. Rajendran v. State of Tamil Nadu [1982] 3 SCR 628; Union of India v. Godfrey Philips [1985] Supp. 3 SCR 123; Kasinka Trading v. Union of India [1995] 1 SCC 274; Excise Commissioner, U.P. v. Ram Kumar [1976] Supp. SCR 532. 11. Shri M.N. Rao the learned senior advocate, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the finding of the High Court that the surplus employees of HAL were already absorbed and they are the employees of the State and, therefore, the impugned Act has no application to them should be sustained by us followed by the finding of the High Court that termination is not on account of retrenchment; but on the ground that the industry has become 'sick' and the scheme of absorption was complete and having been implemented pursuant to the agreement entered into by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the various other parties and the Government should not now be allowed to turn back from that solemn undertaking should not be allowed to be agitated in the Court and the view expressed by the High Court should be upheld by us. 12. Act No. 14 of 1997 is effective from 26-11-1996. The said Act declares that no employee of a State Governmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e any application to the present employees at all. It may be for the purpose of convenience or for other reasons, the Government may have placed them in supernumerary post or other kinds of posts, but it was publicly declared before a competent statutory forum that the modalities for placement of 1,486 employees in various Government departments and State level public enterprises are complete and, therefore, that position cannot now be doubted or disputed. 15. In this background, we do not think it is necessary for us to go into the complex questions of the competence of the State Legislature to enact the Act, effect of the Act, application of doctrine of 'promissory estoppel', the manner in which the same would operate in spite of the scheme framed under the SICA and whether in the light of section 32 of the SICA, the scheme would override the Act or not. These ques- tions become academic and the correctness of decision on ques- tions of law recorded by the High Court on these aspects is left open to be agitated in appropriate proceedings. 16. The High Court has given a finding that the workmen in question as enumerated in the scheme of the BIFR referred to earlier have been dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Government would be a drain on the public exchequer was a matter certainly present in the mind of the Government before taking various steps culminating in the scheme sanctioned by the BIFR. In trying to solve various problems, the Government has to balance several interests and devise methods to suit the needs of the situation. In the present case, when certain industries had become 'sick' and a large number of employees were likely to be uprooted and, thus, a human problem arose, the Government sought to work out certain solutions which resulted in a scheme framed by the BIFR, now to say that such a scheme could not have been framed and that scheme would affect the rights of the other employees of the Government or was likely to affect the finance of the Government is only the result of unimaginative narrow thinking on the part of the Government by relying on bureaucracy used to the usual red tapism. To depend upon the reports of the bureaucracy, which cannot take decision of such large magnitude involving human problem, would only indicate that the realities of the matter are ignored. It is only after due deliberation and after considering the financial and administrativ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
