P.SAHADEVAN v. THE STATE OF KERALA

SRI BS SYAMANTAK, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).8542/2015 3 P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.8542 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2024 JUDGMENT The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: a) Call for the records leading to Exhibit 17 and quash the same by the issuance of a certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction; b) Declare that the petitioners and the other 63 employees categorized as seasonal employees in the Co- operative Sugars Ltd, Chittur are entitled for the Ex- gratia compensation as computed in the case of the Regular-Non- seasonal employees of the 3rd respondent undertaking under the Social Safety Net Programme formulated under the Exhibit P1 GO; c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to disburse to the petitioners and the other 63 employees categorized as seasonal employees in the Co-operative Sugars Ltd, Chittur the Ex-gratia compensation as computed in the case of Regular/Non-seasonal employees of the 3rd respondent undertaking under the W.P(C).8542/2015 4 Social Safety Net Programme formulated under the Exhibit P1 GO; AND d) Issue such other appropriate writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. [SIC]

2. The petitioners were the employees of the Cooperative Sugars Ltd, Chittur. During the year 2003, the Government of Kerala had evolved a scheme for restricting of State Level Public Enterprises. The Cooperative Sugars Ltd. is one of the such State Level Public Enterprise identified by the Government. It is submitted that, out of the large number of applications received by the Board of the Cooperative Sugars Ltd, the Board decided to accept the application of 210 regular employees, 68 seasonal employees, 36 casual workers and relieve them from service on 19.01.2005 with retrospective effect from the afternoon of 31.12.2004. The petitioners herein were also 10 out of the 68 employees who were categorized as seasonal employees in the Cooperative Sugars Ltd, Chittur relieved from service on

31.12.2004. According to the petitioners, they and most of the other 63 seasonal employees are persons who had joined the Cooperative W.P(C).8542/2015 5 Sugars Ltd, Chittur as temporary employees and were all later made permanent staff of the Cooperative Sugars Ltd and were being granted all the service benefits on par with any other designated or recognized permanent staff. It is submitted that, all 68 employees categorized as seasonal employees were being given all service benefits and service regulations applicable to the permanent employees. Later, as per the memorandum of settlement arrived at between the management and the union of the employees, it was agreed that the seasonal employees who have completed 15 years service will be made non seasonal. It is the case of the petitioners that, in the case of seasonal workers who are usually engaged during the cane crushing period, which will vary from 1 month to 8 months every year and after the crushing season is over, the employees will be laid off and retaining allowance at the rate of 50%, 30% and 20% will be paid to the seasonal, skilled, semi skilled and unskilled workers respectively. It is submitted that the seasonal employees were also eligible for full gratuity of 15 days wages as per the Gratuity Act. Even the salary and all other allowances will be the same for both. Now it is stated that, inspite of representation by the management pointing out that, in case of 68 employees categorized as W.P(C).8542/2015 6 seasonal employees should be treated on par with the regular employees for computation of ex gratia compensation, the government refused to accede the request of the management and now also from the petitioners and other seasonal employees. Hence the petitioners and several others approached this Court and this Court directed them to file fresh representation. The grievance of the petitioners is that the 1st respondent without considering the contents therein had dismissed the same. Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is filed.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader.

4. The petitioners are challenging Ext.P7 order passed by the Government. This Court perused Ext.P7. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of Ext.P7. ‘4. The Administrator, CHICOPS, in his letter read as 3rd paper above, has reported that, the petitioner's demand, for VRS compensation at par with non- seasonal / regular employees, which is an injustice and unfair demand because the non-seasonal employees are working on all working days through out the year, where as the seasonal employees are working only in crushing seasons which is W.P(C).8542/2015 7 below 6 months in a year. It is also reported that no promises were given by the management that they will be treated as non-seasonal / regular employees and while calculating the VRS compensation, the management had taken up the matter with the Public Sector Restructuring and Internal Audit Board (RIAB). The RIAB and the Government had accepted the calculation of VRS compensation at par with the Badli / temporary employees and accordingly the fund was released. While applying for VRS compensation, all the seasonal employees were fully aware of the facts that they were eligible for Compensation only at par with the Badlies, and hence the representation is devoid of any merit for consideration.

5. Government have examined the matter in detail, and found that the Chittur Co-operative Sugars was running at a loss since the discontinuance of arrack sale consequent on its ban in the State in 1996. Thereafter, the sugar production was also discontinued from the year 2002. On account of the acute financial crisis in CHICOPS, the employees were not paid there full salary, and they were allowed to take VRS under SSNP. The petitioners failed to adduce any fresh evidence in support of their claim, and hence the request of the petitioners is not maintainable under law or facts. Hence the representation read as 2nd paper above is rejected by Government’ W.P(C).8542/2015 8

5. The Government considered the matter in detail and thereafter rejected the representation. I see no reason to interfere with the same. These are policy matters of the Government in which the jurisdiction of this Court is limited. The petitioners have not raised any infringement of any fundamental right because of the rejection of the claim as per Ext.P7. It is submitted in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent that, Ext.P1 scheme was framed by the Government with an intention to avert serious distress to employees and their families on account of unemployment likely to happen due to restructuring of State Level Public Enterprises. It is submitted that to introduce voluntary retirement scheme offering a monetary package linked to service already rendered or balance service left before normal date of retirement, whichever is less. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that, there is no merit in the contention of the petitioners. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE Sbna/ W.P(C).8542/2015 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8542/2015 PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1: COPY OF G.O.(P)NO.73/2003/ID DATED 24.6.2003 FORMULATING AND APPROVING THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET PROGRAMME. P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.1.2005 SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDUSTRIES. P3: COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF COMPENSATION ALONG WITH A LETTER DATED 29.1.2005 FORWARDED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 6.8.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO ALL THE RESPONDENTS. P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.11.2012 IN WPC.NO.35203/2005 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.01.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT. P7: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.1.2014 OF THE GOVERNMENT.