9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioners are also challenging the letter dated 20-4-2005 by the General Manager (Textiles) of the NTC (DP R), whereby instructions have been issued to five units of NTC (DP R) Region directing the General Manager to convey that the workmen desirous of availing Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) should submit their applications to the management for consideration. The writ petitioners are posted at various units of NTC and their apprehension is that once the majority of the workmen accept the VRS offered under the Office Memorandum dated 13-1-2005 the management of NTC would close down five viable units of NTC without fulfilling the statutory obligations and in violation of the orders passed by BIFR in sanctioning the rehabilitation scheme as also the order passed by the Supreme Court directing the several units of NTC to implement the scheme. 6. It may be mentioned that NTC had made a reference to BIFR which was registered as Case No. 501 of 1994 and the BIFR declared the NTC as a sick company. After exploring all the possibilities of revival and rehabilitation of the company and after hearing all the parties the BIFR on 22-2-2002 sanctioned the scheme for rehabilitation of NTC. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. A copy of the memorandum dated 13-1-2005 is Annexure-III to the writ petition. 8. It is alleged that this action of the respondents in offering Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme (MVRS) is arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, mala fide and in contravention of the scheme sanctioned by the BIFR. 9. A counter-affidavit was filed in the writ petition on behalf of the NTC and we have perused the same. It is alleged in the preliminary objections therein that five persons have filed the writ petition in an effort to subvert and jeopardize an All India revival scheme under which the respondent has already ( a ) ensured that the assets are unencumbered by issuing Government Guaranteed Tax Free Bonds for Rs. 248.69 crores to banks and financial institutions against a One Time Settlement; ( b ) mobilised Rs. 1,779.35 crores for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) through Government Guaranteed Bonds; ( c ) ensured closure of 65 of the 66 unviable mills and granted VRS to 44,229 employees at a cost of Rs. 1,548.39 crores; paid Rs. 179.86 crores towards statutory dues and Rs. 12.67 crores towards interest on Provident Fund contribution and ESI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the revival of the viable mills. This envisaged modernisation and renovation to be completed within a period of three years, i.e ., 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. However, due to delay in the sale of surplus land and machinery the revival of the mills could not be undertaken within the stipulated time as per the sanctioned scheme. There was a feeling within a large section of the workmen of the five viable mills that they should in all fairness be given an option to elect for VRS or MVRS as had been given to their counterparts in other mills of the respondent. The trade unions of all the five mills made a representation to the respondent No. 3 in this respect and in this context the office memorandum dated 13-1-2005 was issued. 15. In para 2.10 of the counter-affidavit it is stated that on 3-3-2005, the question of rehabilitation of all the subsidiaries of the NTC was considered by the Board of Reconstruction of Public Sector Enterprises and the Board endorsed a proposal to re-structure the NTC into a single company by merging all subsidiary companies into respondent No. 2, i.e ., the holding company. It was also proposed that the rehabilitation efforts would be concentrated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nviable mills and surplus workmen of viable mills in the scheme was merely to clarify that in respect of these categories the appellant would have no discretion and that it was mandatory to offer VRS to such workmen. However, there was no bar to offer VRS to other workmen also. We agree with this submission. There is nothing to show that other workmen cannot be offered VRS. 21. It may be mentioned that the memoranda of understanding signed between the NTC and the trade unions were made part of the scheme. By these memoranda of understanding the trade unions of these viable mills agreed that workers could be shifted from mill to mill and workers rendered surplus due to revision of workload norms, closure, merger and privatization may opt for VRS. 22. The scheme was based on the assumption that the appellant would achieve optimum capital utilization during 2005-06. However, while the net losses for the year ending March, 2001 stood at Rs. 58.48 crores, the present losses stand at about Rs. 251.75 crores. 23. Due to certain reasons the sanctioned schemes of all the 9 subsidiaries of the NTC, including that of the appellant, could not be effectively implemented. These reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r discretion under article 226 of the Constitution. 27. It is an admitted fact that as on 30-9-2005, 1,965 out of 2,300 employees of the appellant has been relieved. Of these employees, 1,238 were relieved on 30-9-2005 itself, but whose payment could not released on account of the stay order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 7-10-2005. 28. It may be noted that the writ petition was filed by five persons belonging to management staff. The writ petitioners claimed that they have a right to compel the appellant to keep the mills running, despite the fact that the wage bill itself is Rs. 17.93 crores per annum and the mills are not even able to generate 12 per cent of this wage bill. It is evident that the appellant faces a serious law and order problem in its mills as hundreds of workmen who have been ( sic ) relief are demanding their payments and have been surviving without any payment since October 2005. 29. Apart from that the petitioners have failed to demonstrate that any legal right of theirs has been infringed. The appellant has stated that it has no intention to dispense with the services of the writ petitioners, if they do not wish to accede to the VRS. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
