Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Harendra Nath Raj vs Sri M.T. Krishna Babu And Others on 7 April, 2017
Author: Sanjib Banerjee
Bench: Sanjib Banerjee
1 7.4.201702
md.
CPAN 780 of 2015 In F.M.A. 1709 of 2013 (Main file not here) Harendra Nath Raj
-Vs-
Sri M.T. Krishna Babu and Others Mr. Pabitra Charan Bhattacharyya, Mr. Sunanda Mohon Ghosh ... for the Petitioner Mr. L.K. Gupta, Mr. Krishna Pada Pal ... for the contemnors Mr. Kaushik Chanda,Addl.Solicitor General Ms. Ashima Roy Choudhury .. for Union of India This contempt petition has remained pending for a considerable time to await the decision of the Central Government on the fate of the petitioner. The petitioner is only one of thousands of retired employees of the Calcutta Dock Labour Board seeking the benefit of a revised scale of pension.
An affidavit has been affirmed on behalf of the Central Government by a Joint Secretary to the Ministry of Shipping. It is evident from such affidavit that there are 5693 pensioners under the Calcutta Dock Labour Board and the current expenditure on account of regular pension is about Rs.108 crore based on the figures for the financial year 2015-2016. The affidavit also reveals that the financial burden of the CDLB 1 2 is due to increase upon more employees retiring and the proposed revision of pay, allowances and pension. According to the affidavit, CDLB has a liability of pension arrears and pension fund to the extent of Rs.1265 crore and such liability will only rise.
It appears from the affidavit that the CDLB has 63 Dock Labour Board workers and 54 employees of the Board and its annual income is to the tune of Rs.51 crore. However, such annual income is not enough to meet the annual liability of CDLB.
The petitioner obtained an order from this Court for the pension to be revised or enhanced. The contempt petition has been filed upon the enhanced amount not being paid. Upon CDLB filing its affidavit and indicating that it did not have the resources to meet its existing liabilities, leave alone pension at the enhanced rate, the Union was impleaded herein and Learned Additional Solicitor-General was requested to look into the matter.
It transpires from the affidavit of the Union referred to above that the merger of the CDLB with the Kolkata Port Trust would not only not enure to the benefit of CDLB, but it would foist a liability of Rs.1265 crore on KoPT which already makes an annual loss in excess of Rs.200 crore. The affidavit of the 2 3 Union reveals that the mergers of similar bodies as the CDLB with the port authorities have taken place at the other major ports and without any monetary involvement of the Central Government or any financial liability being foisted on the port authorities.
In view of the stand taken by the Central Government, nothing further can be done, at least in course of the present proceedings.
As to the petitioner's allegation of contempt, it must be appreciated that for an act to be contumacious it must be deliberate and wilful. In the matter of payment of money, it would have been contumacious if CDLB or its officials had the money or the access to money, but despite such position, they did not make the payment in terms of the order of this Court. As noticed above, that is not the case. Quite plainly, CDLB does not have the means to pay the pension at the enhanced rate on the basis of the orders passed by this Court.
Since there does not appear to be any wilful or deliberate violation of any order of Court by the alleged contemnors, CPAN 780 of 2015 is dropped by leaving the petitioner and others similarly placed as the petitioner to pursue whatever other remedy may be available to them to obtain their enhanced pension in accordance with law.
3 4 There will be no order as to costs.
(Sanjib Banerjee,J.) (Samapti Chatterjee, J.) 4