AJOY KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS. ETC. versus UNION OF INDLA & ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
I l
1-,
!
I
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
252
AJOY KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS. ETC.
v.·
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.
12fst March, 1984
[Y.V. CHANDRACHUD C.J., R.S. PATI!AK Al'D SABYASACHI
·
MUKHARJI, JJ.)
l
Constitution t>[ India 1950,
Artie/~.• 14, I9(1) (g), ' Artie/~ JIB & G•~~trar
!murance Businrss (Natia~tolisQtion) Act 1972 Src. 16, Rixhr ~( Cemrol Gam~
mcnt to from~ Jcht-s under tilt Act-Whtthtr affects fundamrnta/ rifhUof
- rmp/oyeu of companlu constituted unclrr the Act.
1nc/Ju/on of on 1Act In rite Ninth Srltt<lttle dors not prottct ordu at •4
cations luutd undtr the said Act.
·
Schrm~ natifitd undrr Su. 16(1) uhethtr protutrcl.
Introduction of ,.fdrm through ft!litfalion-Law nud Ml ha>t unimsof
oppficotion-Pit<Ymrof mttT.od of introducing r<forms-Whtthtr ptrntiSJib!<-
Srutulory provlsio11 M'htth'r could bt srruck 1/own. 011 viet u/ umltdncllls[on.
.
I
huiMifial Disputrs Act /947-Witetlttr oppficabf~ le> grMral insurQna tom-
.POnln
\
Crn<ral Insurance lJus/nru (Nationali•atiull) Act 1971, &c. 16(1)/.g).
Grn<ra/ Insurance (Rotlottalisatlon anJ Revision of Pay•Scalu nn:Ji!lhtr
Condt1lon. of'St,lrt of Supervisory, Clerlcul and Subordittot6 Stoff) S~
Amrmlment Schrmc of 19SO-Sclttmt <>f 1980 rrfttllif/1/0 r~vlsioll of pay sralts atJ4
othtr lrrnu ond condillons of service-Whtt!ttr u/11o vlru Sec. /6{2) oud ;,.,JiJ-·
· IVhttlttr suf!rrs from vi" oft.tcuslvc <lt/egatlun of /egis/uti!'<! p'uwtr.
• ·
lnttrputotlon of Stotut~s-Couf/t~t b~twet!lt lire statt~tts..:..Ont iptclal othrt'
II • ltntrai-Whlrlr; to prtvnii-TtJI$fur dttamln<ttlon o[.
.
/t /"'rrpretat/on of slatttl<s-Not '"~'' exur/u Ill u~l~llllcs-Pro•is!otll ~
trr "''" dtl•flallt!f po~·er-Curmruclion.
f.
t I
__:.-
.-
A.K. B:\NERJCE V. UNION
. 253
.
to !972 tl\cre were over l 00 lnsuranc~ Companies-Indian and
rnor
'
·
r 1
1
,
The conditions of serv1cc o
t1e emp oyees of these companies were
(ore•gn. d by the rc.1pectivc contracts of service between th~ companies and the
governc
On t3th.May 1971, the Government oflndia a'Sumed manag~ment
' (mploy~esc.ncral insurance companies under the General Insurance (Emergency
of theseS
.
.
.
Provisions) Act, 1971. Th.e General In~uran;e Busmess~(Nat•onal 1sation) Act,
1972 nationalised gcneralJnsur~nce busmes5..o
·
Fo;•r merger schemes ~ere framed in 1973 b>· the Central Gov~rnment in
ercise of the powers contained in s. 16(1) of the Act and four co:np, nies;
~riental Fire and General Insurance Company, Naliolkll Insurance Complny
N•"' India Assurance Compan)' and United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
wm merged into and they . alone "ere allowed to carry OTl the busine.s of
g<ocral insuran~e. The1c comp1nies started functioning from lst.January, 1973
~nd the process of merg~r was completed by 1st January, 1974 when the 8forc-
$3id four schemes came into force.
The Government of India_by a notification dat.:d 27th !>by, 1974, fronted a
'.cheme' called the General Insurance (Rationalisation and Re,·ision of Pay
Sal,. and Other Cond1tions of Service or Supervisory, Clerical and Subordhate
StU!') S:h<me, 1974 in exercise of the powers conferred by s. 16(,)(g) of the Act.
This achcme provided for tbe rationalisation and revisiC>n of pay scales and otbcr
ltrms and condilions of service of employ«s working in sup:rvisory, clericJI and
!llbordioate positions 'and governed the pay scales, dearness atlowanec, other
a!Jowaoces and other t~rms and conditions of the general insurance emp!oyees.
Plroyaph 23 or the Scheme prolrided that the new 'seal~ of pay' shall remain
in force till Decnnber 31, 1976 and thereafter shall continue to be in force
Wll<:!S modified by the Central Go,-emment.
lo 1976, the Board of Directors approved a policy for promotion. On lit .
June, 1976. another SCheme by Which amendment~ y,·erc made With reg:lrd tO
P~vidtnt Fund, Was Introduced. On 30th July 1977, a Scheme amending pro-
Y~IOfls regarding skk leave was also introduced.
IC I The employees submit!ed a memorandum obj~ti~g to. the revision of pay
1 ~t and other cond•tions or service and w~ntcd a n:f~~nc.: to the Industrial
~
1
~n~l. The class IU nod IV emplo~ees .hoWe\·er did oot accept the revision of
rv~ee Condllio
•
· d · d
· 1
di1pufe. The
. ns, Pay. ,"C~le-s l!earnes4 allowance, ~tc. ~~d r'IJ~e ~n ustrta
lnll bl
ro "'ere conctll~tJon procccdinLS and th~re was la1lurc to b~mg about
ca e scttktnent or dhpute1•
. ·
.
•
In 1980 the G
.
.
.
.
f'
.
and b
1 • '
oveExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.
Lex