CIVIL APPEAL 4760 of 2016 on 1 January 1996

1. HSCL VR Employees Association, Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro through its Associate member Ramayan Sharma son of late Lalju Sharma resident of C/o R.P. Singh, Sector 9-C, Khwaja Nagar P.O.P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro

2. Dinesh Thakur son of late Yugeshwar Thakur resident of Sector 9-C, Qr no. 494 P.O.P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro

3. Bishambar Yadav son of late Rama PAtu Yadav resident of Sector 9C, Street 20, Qr no. 412 P.O.P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro

4. Mahendra Prasad son of late Rajendra Prasad Chitragupta Colony Plot mo. 16-A, Tetunia P.O.P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro

5. Tej Narayan son of late Gainu Prasad resident of Sector-III-C, Qr no. 152 P.O.P.S. Bokaro Steel City Dist Bokaro ... … Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Steel, Govt of India, 134, North Block, P.O.P.S. & Dist New Delhi

2. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited, a Government of India Company having its Head office at 5/1, Commissariat Road, Hastings, P.O.P.S. & Dist Kolkata (West Bengal).

3. The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd, 5/1, Commissariat Road, Hastings, P.O.P.S. & Dist Kolkata (West Bengal).

4. The Director (Finance), Hindustan Steel Works Construction ltd, 5/1, Commissariat Road, Hastings, P.O.P.S. & Dist Kolkata (West Bengal).

5. The General Manager (P&A) Hindustan Steel Works Construction ltd, 5/1, Commissariat Road, Hastings, P.O.P.S. & Dist Kolkata (West Bengal).

6. The General Manager, Hindustan Steel Works Construction ltd, Bokaro Steel City, P.O.P.S. & Dist Bokaro.

... … Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. Nitu Sinha, Advocate Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate

--------

Order No.18 /Dated: 23[rd] September 2025

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners

for the following reliefs:

“1 a. For the issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to forthwith release the following benefits to the petitioner:

i. Difference of Vth Pay revision arrear for the period of 1.1.1996 to 31.12.1997 with CPF contribution with interest.

ii. Difference of increased DA with effect from 1.1.1999 till date of their separation from the service with effective CPF. iii. One month's notice pay

iv. Difference of VR benefits due to difference on increased DA (Ex-gratia, Gratuity, CPF, Leave Encashment payment etc.)

v. Payment of cost of Transport Allowance (TA) and setting in allowance to their home town. vi. Interest on late payment of CPF interest

vii. Payment of HPL (Half pay leave) and Additional leave

viii. Payment of interest on co-operative society dues

ix. Payment of Leave Encashment (hardship cases), LTC, LLTC, medical benefits.

x. Interest on all the above heads for the period of delay in tendering payment @18%.

b. Declaring that the acts and action of the respondent authorities in not making payment under the aforesaid head as illegal and arbitrary in lieu of the fact that the respondent company is no more a sick company and has been generating profit for the past few years.

And/or

c. Pass such other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as Your Lordship may deems fit and proper.”

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the issue involved in this writ application has already been decided by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur Bench; as such, interest of justice would be sufficed by giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the 5[th] Respondent in order to ventilate their individual grievance.

3. Ld. Counsel for the Respondents does not have any serious objection.

4. Having regard to the confined prayer of the Petitioners, the instant writ application stands disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioners to file a joint representation before the 5[th] Respondent along with all relevant documents to be relied upon by them including the judgment passed by the High Court of Chhatyisgarh, Bilaspur Bench.

5. The moment the said joint representation is received by the

5[th] Respondent, he shall look into the matter and take a decision with regard to the prayers made in this writ application and pass a speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulation within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

23.09.2025 Amit