HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. AND ANR.versusBANSHI LAL AND ORS.

                 HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. AND ANR.                                  A
                               v.
                      BANSHI LAL AND ORS.

                            DECEMBER 8, 2005

                  [S.B. SINHA AND P.P. NAOLEKAR, JJ.]                            B

     Contract Act, 1872:
      Offer and acceptance-Closure of Unit-Offer to employees to either
opt for VRS or get transferred to another unit-Employees opting for VRS--        C
Later seeking withdrawal of same-Employer not allowing the withdrawal-
High Court ordering reinstatement on ground that offer was withdrawn
before its acceptance-Challenge to-Held: The offer made by an employee
could be withdrawn by him before it was accepted-The scheme being
contractual in nature, the provisions of Indian Contract Act would apply.
                                                                                 D
     Service Law-VRS-Offer of VRS withdrawn by employee before its
acceptance-Effect of
      On closure of a unit of Appellant-Government Undertaking, the
respondents-employees working therein were offered to either opt for the
Voluntary Retirement Scheme or get transferred to another unit Respondent-       E
employees opted for voluntary retirement However, later they withdrew their
offers. Appellant did not allow respondents to withdraw in view of the
stipulation contained in the option from filled up by the respondents that the
option once exercised could not be withdrawn. Aggrieved respondents filed
Writ Petition which was dismissed by Single Judge. Division Bench allowed        F
the appeal holding that since respondents had withdrawn their offers before
the same were accepted, they are entitled to reinstatement with back wages.
Hence the present appeal.

     Disposing of the appeal, the Court

      HELD: The offer made by an employee could be withdrawn by him before       G
it was accepted. The scheme was contractual in nature, the provisions of the
Indian Contract Act, 1872 would apply. No exception, thus, can be tak-en to
the findings of the Division Bench of the High Court. However, there cannot
be any doubt or dispute whatsoever that even if the termination of services of

                                     665                                         H
    666                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. 5 S.C.R.

A   the Respondents herein was found to be illegal, they could be directed to be
    continued in service until they reached their age of superannuation.
    Respondents have already received a huge amount in terms of the voluntary
    retirement scheme. The amount payable to them by or on behalf of the
    Appellant, thus, must be directed to be adjusted with the amounts of back
    wages, current wages or the future wages, if any. The Appellant shall be
B   entitled to transfer the Respondents to the units which are working on such
    post or posts which they had been holding on the relevant dates.
                                                               (668-D-H; 669-A)
          Bank ofindia and Ors. etc. v. O.P. Swarnakur and Ors. etc., [2003) 2
    sec 721, relied on.
c         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1807 of2001.
         From the Judgment and Order dated 27.7.2000 of the Rajasthan High
    Court in D.B.C.S.A. No. 1387of1997.
          Deba Prasad Mukherjee for the Appellants.
D         Vijay Hansaria, Ms. Minakshi Sarma, Kanishk Gupta and Sunil Kumar
    Jain for the Respondents.
          The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
           S.B. SINHA, J. The Appellant is a Government of India Undertaking.
E   It had various copper mines and factories situate in different parts of the
    country. One of its mines was situate in the District of Alwar in the State of
    Rajasthan known as 'Dariba Copper Project'. It is stated that the mines
    situated in other States are lying closed except one mine being Malij Khan
    situate in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Having regard to the fact that the
    said Dariba Mine was to be closed, a notice of closure had been issued. The
F   Appellant Company, however, had also floated a Voluntary Retirement Scheme
    in the year 1993. Options were called for from the employees of the said
    Dariba Mine Project as to whether they would like to be transferred to the
    mines operating in other States or opt for the voluntary retirement scheme.
    Out of241 employees working in the said Dariba Mine, 112 opted for voluntary
G   retirement under the scheme. I 0 of them, however, later on withdrew their
    offers. They were not allowed to do so by the Appellant herein on the premise
    that as the options had been exercised in printed proforma which contained
    a clause that such option once exercised could not be withdrawn; their offers
    stood accepted.

H         Having regard to the aforementioned stand of the Appellant, a writ
            HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. v. BANSHI LAL [SINHA, J.]                   667
petition was filed by them which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge.             A
An intra-court appeal, however, was filed only by six persons out of the ten
writ petitioners. The other four persons, thus, aci::epted the judgment of the
learned Single Judge.

      By reason of the impugned judgment, a Division Bench of the Rajasthan
High Court opined that the stand of the Appellant Company was not correct,            B
as the concerned employees had withdrawn their offers before the same were
accepted. Allowing the appeal filed by the Respondents herein, it was directed:

            "Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The judgment of the learned
        Single Judge is set aside. It is directed that the appellants shall be        C
        treated to have continued in service of the respondent company. They
        shall be reinstated with back wages."

      Mr. Deba Prasad Mukherjee, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the Appellant, submitted that the High Court was not correct in issuing
the aforementioned directions keeping in view the.fact that the Appellant is          D
not in a position to re-employ the Respondents as except one mine all other
mines are closed.

      Our attention was further drawn to an order dated 12.03.2001 passed by
this Court which is as under :

            "Leave is granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The             E
        order under challenge shall remain stayed pending disposal of the
        appeal. It is needless to mention that if the appellants fail in the appeal
        they will have to give wages to the respondents including the back
        wages for the period for which otherwise they would have been in
        service. It does not preclude the respondents from receiving the              F
        benefits under the voluntary retirement scheme which would be without
        prejudice to their contentions in this appeal."

      It was submitted that pursuant to or in furtherance of the said order, the
amount payable in terms of the voluntary retirement scheme has already been
paid, details whereof are as under :                                                  G




                                                                                      H
    668                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. 5 S.C.R.

A "SI. Name                Date of      Date of Sup- Amount paid Amount
     No.                   Birth        erannuation · under YRS
                                        on attaining
                                        of 58 years
                                        age

B    I.      Banshi Lal    05.ll.43     30.11.2001     63608.20       20.4.2002
     2.      Gyarshi Lal   27.09.50     30.09.2008     173146.80      23.4.2002
     3.      Hardeva       21.05.49     30.09.2007     172015.50      30.4.2002
     4.      Kishan Lal    26.11.50     30.ll.2008     169966.00      30.4.2002
c 5. Nahnuram              26.11.52     30.11.2010     163304.10      23.4.2002
     6.    ChokhaRam       03.04.50     30.04.2008     178788.00      30.4.2002
                                                                             "
           Mr. Vijay Hansaria, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of
D the Respondents, on the other hand, supported the judgment of the High
    Court.

         The contention raised on behalf of the Appellant herein that in view of
  the stipulation contained in the option form to be tilled up by the employees
  that the option once exercised cannot be withdrawn stands concluded by a
E three-Judge Bench Judgment of this Court in Bank of India and Ors. etc. v.
  0. P. Swarnakar and Ors etc., [2003] 2 SCC 721, wherein it was held that the
  scheme being contractual in nature, the provisions of the Indian Contract Act,
  1872 would apply and, thus, an offer made by an employee could be withdrawn
  by him before it was accepted. No exception, thus, can be taken to the
  findings of the Division Bench of the High Court. However, there cannot be
F any doubt or dispute whatsoever that even if the termination of services of
  the Respondents herein was found to be illegal, they could be. directed to be
  continued in service until they reached their age of sup-erannuation.
  Respondent No. I, Banshi Lal, had already reached his age of superannuation.
  So far as the other Respondents are concerned, however, they would be
G entitled to continue in service till they reach the age of superannuation.
        'It is, however, not disputed that they have received a huge amount in
  terms of the voluntary retirement scheme pursuant to the obsei;vations made
  by this Court. The amount payable to them by or on behalf of the Appellant, .
  thus, must be directed to be adjusted with the amounts of back wages, current
H wages or the future wages, if any.
           HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD. v. BANSHI LAL {SINHA, J.]              669
      The Appellant shall be entitled to transfer the Respondents to the       A
mines which are working on such post or posts which they had been holding
on the relevant dates. In the event, it is found that the Appellant has paid
any excess amount to the said employees, it is made clear that the future
salary payable to them would be adjusted from the amount which had already
been received by them, if any.
                                                                               B
      The Respondents are directed to join their posts at the transferred
places forthwith, but not later than 15 days from the date of communication
made to them in that behalf by the competent authority of the Appellant.

      This appeal is disposed of with the aforementioned observations and      C
directions. No costs.

D.G.                                                   Appeal disposed of.