STATE OF JHARKHAND & Anr. v. HARIHAR YADAV & Ors.

their remedy under the Companies Act, 1956 or under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, it is not acceptable regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and the plight in which the employees have been put in. This Court on earlier E occasion had also categorically clarified that this is a different situation and it is not laying down the law that in every case the State Government should come forward to pay. It is a problem of great magnitude affecting human rights and the purpose of living as enshrined F under Article 21 of the Constitution. That apart, it is not a case where the services of the employees have been terminated or retrenched or even there is no decision that the posts have been abolished. [Para 38) [937-E-H]

#7. It is not a case where the Court shall confine the G relief to the respondents alone. Earlier this Court had constituted a Committee and the State of Bihar had deposited rupees fifty crores for all the Corporations and the employees working in BHALCO who were not paid salary from 1995 were proportionately paid. Their H 910 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 14 S.C.R. A B identities are known. The employees who have died, their legal representatives are easily identifiable. A man in dire need cannot fight a litigation against two experimenting States to get his dues. It is the duty of the constitutional court that all should be paid their dues as this Court may think fit. [Para 51] [944-F-H, 945-A]

#8. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the concept of social justice under the Constitution, role of a model employer in a welfare State and the conduct of both the C States, the Court directs that (i) The employees who were paid certain amount after this Court had directed for deposit of rupees fifty crores by the State of Bihar and have not been absorbed by JHALCO, they should be paid their salary from 1.1.1995 till 29.12.2001. (ii) The State of D Jharkhand is directed to pay from 29.12.2001 till 13.9.2004. The cut-off date has been fixed for the State of Jharkhand as it had issued the notification on 29.12.2001 creating an erroneous impression and confusion. The date for State of Bihar has been determined regard being had to the E date the Central Government took a decision asking the State of Bihar to go for liquidation. (iii) The State of Bihar is also directed to deduct the amount already paid by virtue of the order passed by this Court. However, the State of Jharkhand shall pay the entire amount of salary for the period as directed by this Court as it has not paid anything to the employees. (iv) Both the States shall compute the salary component after granting the benefit of pay revision which has been extended to other employees. (v) The amount, as directed to be paid, shall G be paid with 7.5% simple interest per annum. The claim for absorption stands closed. [Para 52] [945-A-C, E-F, H; 946-A-C] F