VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.L.D.C. LTD. AND ANR. versus R. V ARAPRASAD AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 226 · Decided: 22-05-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SHIVARAJ V. PATIL · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.l.D.C. LTD. 
AND ANR. 
v. 
R. V ARAPRASAD AND ORS. 
B 
MAY 22, 2003 
[SHIVARAJ V. PATIL AND ARIJIT PASAYAT, JJ.] 
Service law: 
c 
Voluntary Retirement Scheme: 
APS!DC Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme 1995: 
VRS Ex-gratia and reckoning of eligibility-Cut off date-Calculation 
of-Held: Is the date feted for accepting application of the optee and not the 
D actual date of relieving him from service. 
Notice pay of three months-Entitlement of-Held: Optees of scheme 
are entitled to notice pay-However, when they continue in service having 
drawn full salary and allowance beyond stipulated notice period they are not 
E entitled to the notice pay. 
F 
Voluntary retirement application-Acceptance of-Withdrawal-
Maintainability of-Held: Once the application is accepted in terms of scheme 
it cannot be withdrawn even if employees apply for withdrawal before they 
were relieved from services. 
Appellant-Corporation issued Voluntary Retirement Scheme (YRS) 
Phase I for its employees. In terms of the scheme employees were entitled 
to three months' pay in lieu of notice and if the management took time in 
accepting the application of the employee and allowed the notice period 
to lapse or the individual concerned withdrew all salary during the notice 
G period, the employees would not be entitled to the notice period pay as 
they drew salary during that period. As employees opting for YRS had 
worked 15 days beyond the cut off date and earned salary for the period, 
they were given two months and 15 days notice pay in addition to 15 days 
salary. Appellants issued another YRS (Phase II) and fixed 28.1.1998 as 
H 
cut off date for calculating YRS claims of the employees. Respondent Nos. 
226 
VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIR. A.P.S.ID.C LTD. r. R. VARAPRASAD 
227 
l to 32 and also other employees submitted their option for voluntary A 
retirement which was accepted. However, State Government took time to 
provide the funds to pay claims of employee as such the optees were 
relieved from service on 31.7.1998. They were given full salary and 
allowances up to the date they were relieved including period of notice 
pay beyond the cut off date but not the notice pay. Aggrieved respondent B 
filed writ petition. High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the 
appellants to pay three months notice pay treating the date of relief from 
service as the cut off date and to calculate the terminal benefits of the 
optees as if they continued in service till 31. 7.1998 notwithstanding the 
cut off date fixed. Division Bench upheld the order. 
c 
Appellants issued VRS Phase III and 31.10.1998 was fixed as the cut 
off date. Respondents-employee W and A filed application seeking 
voluntary retirement. Appellants accepted the same and also the 
respondents acknowledged it. Thereafter respondents applied for 
withdrawal of option. Respondents then filed writ petiiion seeking 
direction to continue in service till they attain superannuation. High Court D 
passed an interim order and the respondents continued in service while 
they were to be relieved from service along with large number of other 
employees on 31.7.1999. High Court then allowed the writ petitions and 
directed the Corporation to continue their services till their attaining the 
age of superannuation. It held that these respondents had made the E 
applications for withdrawal before the effective date and they having not 
accepted the monetary benefits under the VRS, could withdraw their 
applications opting for VRS. Hence the present appeals. 
Appellants-Corporation contended that once the options seeking 
voluntary retirement were accepted with reference to a cut off date the p 
terminal benefits to which the employees were entitled could be calculated 
as on and up to the cut off date and not beyond that period as per the 
VRS; that the employees continued in service beyond the cut off date as 
they were not paid the amount due to them as per VRS; that they were 
paid salary and other allowances even after the cut off date till the date 
on which they were actually relieved from service; that the High Court G 
was not right in holding that the employees were entitled to get notice pay 
even though they were continued in service having drawn full salary and 
allowances beyond the stipulated notice period; and that the High Court 
was also 11ot justified in directing the Corporation to treat two sets of 
optees of VRS-Phase I and

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.