SH. RABINDRANATH MUKHOPADHYAY AND ANR. versus COAL INDIA LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 585 · Decided: 28-02-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, SUJATA V. MANOHAR · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

SH. RABINDRANATH MUKHOPADHYAY AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
COAL INDIA LTD. AND ANR. 
FEBRUARY 28, 1997 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law : 
L. T. C.-Option to enc ash the facility to be effective from a specified 
date-Executives of company given option either to avail L. T.C. by actual C 
travelling or to en cash the facility w.e.f 1. 1.1997 without production of 
certificate of actual travel-Fixing the date as 1. 1.1997 challenged to be 
discriminatory against the employees who would retire before the said 
·date-Held, it being a policy decision unif onnly applicable to· all employees 
of that class, there is no arbitrariness in fu:ation of the date. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) 
No. 3655 of 1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.1.97 of the Madhya Pradesh 
High Court in L.P.A. No. 255 of 1996. 
In-person for the Petitioner No. 1. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
D 
E 
This special leave petition arises from the judgment of the Division 
Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, made un January 15, 1997 in F 
LPA No. 255/96. The first respondent had evolved the LTC Rules for its 
executive cadre employees and the same were last revised on May 15, 1989. 
Thereunder Clause l(b )(ii) postulates that : 
"Once in a block of 4 calender years commencing from the 1st 
January, 1976 the executive cadre employees will be entitled to the G 
concession under these rules for journeys to any place in India. 
This concession will, however, be in lieu of LTC entitlement of 
that year to travel to home town and back. This facility of availing 
LTC for journeys to any place in India once in 4 years will also be 
available to employees whose home towns are either the same or H 
585 
586 
A 
B 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1997) 2 S.C.R. 
very close to their places of posting and so are not entitled to LTC 
for home town. 
The employees and/or members of the family may avail of LTC 
facilities for travel to the same place or to different places of their 
choice in respect of the facility available to visit any place in India 
in a block of 4 years." 
Subsequently, by the Resolutiou No. 159 dated September 14, 1996, 
the respondent had given option in respect of the benefit of the LTC, to 
the Executives of the company or its subsidiary companies without produc-
e tion of certificate, as detailed hereunder : 
"The executives would have the option to choose any one of the 
following alternatives w.e.f. 01.01.1997. 
(a) The existing facilities of LTC i.e. the executive with entitled 
D 
family members may visit any place of India by entitled class of 
· journey once in a Block of Four years. 
OR 
(b) Encash the facility of LTC subject to the limit of Railway far.; 
E 
in the entitled class upto 1700 K.M. each way for the employee 
and entitled family members. 
(ii) The one time option has to be exercised before 31.12.1996 . 
. (iii) Taxes as applicable has to be paid by the executives. 
F 
This will take effect on and from 01.01.1997." 
Consequently, the facility of L TC for travelling to home town was 
also extended to travelling any place in India as per the above resolution 
dated September 14, 1996. Instead of production of the certificate of the 
G actual travel, the Executive have also been given an option either to avail 
of the facility or encash the LTC facility, subject to the limit of Railway 
fare of the entitled class upto a maximum distance of 1700 k.ms. each way 
for the employee and entitled family members. But the above decision has 
been given effect to from January 1, 1997. The petitioner appearing itt 
H person has contended in the High Court as well as before us that the 
-
RABINDRANATHMUKHOPADHYAYv. COAL INDIA LID. 
587 
fixatiqn of the date is arbitrary. We find no force in the contention. It is A 
seen that the aforesaid Resolution communicated by proceedings dated 
October 10, 1996, postuiates an employee who is entitled to avail of the 
facility of LTC, instead of executive class, has been given two options, viz., 
of actual performance of the travel once in a block of four years which 
would be normal one and a salutary policy to enable the employee to 
broaden his vision of thought and action, and to encash the same, instead B 
of actually travelling, which is an exception and proof of production of the 
travel certificate and the expenses incurred therefor has been dispensed 
with. It being a policy decision taken by the respondent-Management, the 
pol
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.