IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NOs.17454-17469 OF 2016(S-RES) Between:
1. Nagaraja.C.S Aged About 70 Years S/O C.V.Suryanarayana Rao Residing At No.118 4th Main Road Income Tax Layout Vijayanagar Bangalore-560 040 2. Srinivasan.B.S Aged About 74 Years S/O H.C.Yoganarasimhan No.216, I.G.Cross 3rd Stage, 4th Block Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore-560 079 3. Nagarajaiah.J Aged About 74 Years S/O Jannappa Residing At No.15/13 Sri Nilaya, 12th Main Shivanagar, Rajajinagar Bangalore-560 010 4. Ramesh.Y Aged About 74 Years S/O Y.Ramakrishnaiah Residing At No.783 4th Cross, 11th Block Nagarabhavi II Stage Bangalore-560 072 5. R.Anandashayanam Aged About 78 Years S/O P.S.Rajagopalan Residing At No.530 8th Main, 11th A Cross J P Nagar 2nd Phase Bangalore-560 085 6. Ramulu.K Aged About 74 Years S/O K.Kondandaiad Residing At No.301/1 Gokul I Stage, II Phase 10th Main, 2nd Cross Bangalore-560 054 7. Venkataramanappa Since Deceased By His LR: Smt. Chandakala (Wife) Aged About 65 Years S/O Doddathimmappa No.472, I.B.Street C Cross, Mathikere Bangalore-560 054 8. G.Lakshmana Aged About 74 Years S/O H.Govinda Dikshith Residing At No.121 3rd Cross, Vivekanandanagar BSK 3rd Stage Bangalore-560 085 9. Vijayasarathy.K.V Aged About 72 Years S/O K.Venkataramaiah Residing At No.1454 7th A Main, RPC Layout Vijayanagar II Stage Bangalore-560 054 10. Narasimhamurthy.s Aged about 74 years, S/o Ninga Iyengar, R/a No.55, Sannidi Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore – 560 004.
11. G.Rajeevalochana, Aged About 72 Years S/O Gundappa No.31, 7th Cross, 7th Main Govindarajanagar Banalore-560 079 12. Venkateshan.K Aged About 74 Years S/O Kalyana Sundaram Residing At No.139 2nd Main, CKA BSK 3rd Stage, III Phase Bangalore-560 085 13. H.N.Srinivasamurthy Aged About 74 Years S/O Narsimha Iyengar Residing At No.785/20 4th Main, Rajajinagar 2nd Stage, A Block Bangalore-560 010 14. Ramachandran.S.R Since deceased by his LRs:
14(1) Pankajam.R Aged About 71 Years W/o Ramachandran.S.R 14(2) Rukmini.R.R.
Aged about 47 years D/o Ramachandran.S.R 14(3) Yuvakumar.R.R Aged about 46 years S/o Ramachandran.S.R 14(4) Krishnaveni.R.R. Aged about 43 years D/o Ramachandran.S.R All are r/at No.26, BSK 3rd Main Road, III Stage, 3rd Phase, Bangalore – 560 085.
15. K.Srinivasan, Aged about 72 years S/o B.L.Krishnamurthy, Residing At No.352 6th Main, N.R.Colony Bangalore-560 019 16. B. Nagendra Kumar Aged About 74 Years S/O M.S.Anantha Rajendra No.92, I Main Amarajyothinagar Bangalore-560 040. ... Petitioners (By Sri.Manohar N, Adv.,) And:
1. M/S ITI Limited ITI Bhavan Corporate Office Doorvaninagar Bangalore-560 016 Represented By Its Chairman And Managing Director 2. The Director M/S ITI Limited Doorvaninagar Bangalore-560 016 3. The Secretary Govt. Of India Department Of Telecommunication New Delhi-01. ... Respondents (By Sri. C.K.Nandakumar, Adv. For R1 & R2 Sri.Navya Shkar, Adv. for R-3) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying a direction to the respondents to pay the interest at the rate of 13% p.a from 1.1.1997 as per clause 5.2 of the scheme on the arrears of revised pay-scale which was paid as admitted by them to the petitioners as per order dtd:27.11.2002 passed in WP No.36875 to 36889 of 2001 (S-Res) c/w Writ Petition Nos.46251 to 46275 of 2001 & writ petitions No.16232 of 2002 (s) vide Annexure-c.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioners are the erstwhile employees of ITI Limited, which is a Government of India undertaking. The petitioners had earlier approached this Court in a batch of Writ petitions viz., W.P.nos.36875-36889/2001 and connected matters.
2. The grievance of the petitioners in those matters were that they were not paid in terms of the Scheme of Voluntary Retirement, wherein the respondent-ITI had agreed to pay the voluntary retirement compensation amount payable under the scheme, which will be calculated based on the monthly emoluments (basic + D.A.) drawn by the employee preceding the day of voluntary retirement; and on revision of pay scales in the Company from retrospective date, the voluntary retirement optee shall be eligible for (a) arrears of pay revision and (b) recalculation of the voluntary retirement compensation amount on revised Basic + D.A.
3. Attention of this Court was drawn to Clause 5.4 of the scheme introduces by the Company for voluntary retirement of non-officer and officers. It was also the contention of the petitioners that for delayed payment, petitioners are also entitled for interest as provided under clause 5.2 of the scheme. Having considered the case of the petitioners, this Court held that the petitioners are entitled for payment of arrears of salary on the basis of revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1997 along with interest in terms of cl.5.2 of the scheme. As a consequence, respondent-ITI was given time till 30.11.2005 to pay in a staggered manner to the petitioners along with interest as payable in terms of cl.5.2 of the scheme.
4. Being aggrieved, the respondent-ITI approached the Division Bench of this Court and having been unsuccessful, approached the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.610/2006. During the course of the proceedings before the Supreme Court, a Revival plan was being finalized before the BIFR. In that regard, an affidavit was filed by the Union of India before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thereafter by order dated 29.8.2014, the Supreme Court took note of the affidavit and in terms of the affidavit and the submissions of the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, that the amount shall be disbursed within three months from the date of the order, the SLP was disposed of.
5. However, inspite of receipt of the settlement amount from the Respondent-Company, the petitioners approached the Contempt Court in CCC Nos.692/2015 and 752-766/2015 (Civil) seeking a direction to the respondents herein to pay the arrears of amount with interest since the said amount is paid in installments in terms of Clause 5.2 of the Scheme. The Contempt Court observes as under:
4. …… that in all there were five schemes under which the voluntary retirement was provided to the petitioners Therefore, the amount is paid in terms of the Scheme on the date of acceptance of the voluntary retirement application; the question of payment of interest would not arise. It is only in cases, where the amount agreed to be paid in installments under Clause 5.2 of the Scheme is attracted and in no other cases. In those cases also, the interest is paid on the amount of installments. But, when there is a revision of pay-scale and that the difference amount is also paid, whether that should be paid with interest is a mute question. The scheme formulated do not cover the area. Clause 5.2 of the Scheme would not attract such payment and therefore, there is no liability to pay the said interest. In fact, these questions have not been gone into in the order, which is sought to be enforced in these cases. As there is an order of Hon’ble Supreme Court and an order of the BIFR settling all the claims of the employees and the payment are made in terms of the said order, merely because interest on the difference in pay- scale is not paid, it cannot be said that the respondents/accused have no respect to the Court order and that there is disobedience. In a contempt petition, this question, which is not decided in the proceedings cannot be gone into. Therefore, we do not see any justification to continue these contempt proceedings.
Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped reserving liberty to the complainants to put-forth a claim, so that the same could be considered by a Court of Law and appropriate order could be passed.”
6. The petitioners are once again before this Court with the following prayer:
a) issue Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or Direction to the Respondents to pay the interest at the rate of 13% p.a. from 01.01.1997 as per clause 5.2 of the scheme on the arrears of revised pay-scale which was paid as admitted by them to the Petitioners as per Order dated 27th November 2002 passed in Writ Petition Nos.36875 to 36889 of 2001(S-RES) c/w. Writ Petition Nos.46251 to 46275 of 2001 & Writ Petition No.16232 of 2002 (s) vide ANNEXURE-C.
b). Pass any such other order/s as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. “ 7. If the grievance of the petitioners is that the order dated 27.11.2002 passed in W.P.No.36875-36889/2001 have not been complied with and the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to comply with the direction issued by this Court, the remedy is not before this Court. The learned Counsel for the petitioners is unable to substantiate or make out a case that the respondent company is liable to pay interest on delayed payment of the difference amount which was required to be paid on revision of pay-scale. Other than submitting that the issue is covered in the order dated 27-11-2002, the learned counsel has said nothing else.
8. It is trait in law, that if a litigant is aggrieved that there is non-compliance of the order issued by this Court, the remedy lies only before the Contempt Court. The petitioners cannot be allowed to seek one more order in the same lines as was done in the earlier Writ Petitions filed before this Court.
9. In the light of the above, Writ petitions are liable to be dismissed and are accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg*