S.M.Alagiry v. The Lic Of India, Rep. By The
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.12.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN W.A.NOS.1777 TO 1781 OF 2017 AND C.M.P.NOS.22533 TO 22537 OF 2017 S.M.Alagiry ...
Appellant in W.A.No.1777/2017 P.Natarajan ...
Appellant in W.A.No.1778/2017 S.Kathiresan ...
Appellant in W.A.No.1779/2017 C.Hari Babu ...
Appellant in W.A.No.1780/2017 S.Babu Viswanath ...
Appellant in W.A.No.1781/2017
Versus
1. The Life Insurance Corporation of India, rep.by the Chairman / the Executive Director (Marketing/PD) Central Office, "Yogakshema", Mumbai-400 021.
2. The Zonal Officer, Southern Zonal Office, Old No.102, New No.153, LIC Building, Anna Salai, Mount Road, Chennai-2.
... 1st and 2nd Respondents in all appeals The Senior Divisional Manager, Salem Division, Salem. .. 3rd respondent in W.A.No.1777/2017 The Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Post Box No.324, LIC Building, 153, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.
... 3rd respondent in W.A.No.1778/2017
The Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Marketing Department, P.B.No.3810, India Life Building, Trichy Road, Coimbatore. ... 3rd respondent in W.A.No.1779/2017 The Senior Divisional Manager, Sales Department, Divisional Office, "Jeevan Prakash", Arcot Road, Vellore-632 004. ... 3rd respondent in W.A.No.1780/2017 The Senior Divisional Manager, Tirunelveli Division, 9-A, Punithavathiar Street, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.
... 3rd respondent in W.A.No.1781/2017 Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 15.9.2017 passed in W.P.No.35411, 36167, 41420, 42298 of 2016 and 4816 of 2017 respectively, on the file of this Court.
Prayer in WP.Nos.35411,36167,41420,42298 of 2016 & 4816 of 2017:- WP.No.35411 of 2016:- To call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in connection with the order of Modification in Ref.Mktg/ ZD/20/206 dated 23.7.2016 to Draft of Annexure III-C and also the order of the 3rd respondent in connection with the orders passed by him in his Proc. No.Nil dated 8.9.2016 in Annexure III and quash the same by holding that the interpretation of the Rules 7 and 8 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Amendment Rules 2016 notified by the respondents 1 and 2 for straight termination without enquiry as unconstitutional and ultravires. WP.No.
36167 of 2016:- To call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in connection with the order of Modification in Ref. Mktg/ zd/ 20/2016 dated 23.7.16 to Draft of Annexure III-C and also the order of the 3rd respondent in connection with the orders passed by him in his proceedings No. Nil dated 27.9.
and quash the same by holding that the interpretation of the Rules 7 and 8 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Amendment Rules 2016 notified by the respondents 1 and 2 for straight termination without enquiry as unconstitutional and ultravires WP.No.41420 of 2016:- To call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in connection with the order of Modification in Ref.Mktg./ ZD/20/2016 dated 23.7.2016 to Draft of Annexure III-C and also the order of the 3rd respondent in connection with the order passed by him in Ref.Mktg/ Sales dated 31.10.
2016 and quash the same by holding that the interpretation of the Rules 7 and 8 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and conditions of Service) Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Amendment Rules 2016 notified by the respondents 1 and 2 for straight termination without enquiry as unconstitutional and ultravires WP.No.42298 of 2016:- To call for the records on the file of the 1st Respondent in connection with the order of Modification in Ref.mktg./ZD/20/2016 dated 23.07.2016 to Draft of Annexure III-C and also the order of the 3rd Respondent in connection with the order passed by him in Ref.Sales /DO dated 2.11.
16 and quash the same by holding that the interpretation of the Rules 7 and 8 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of service) Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of certain Terms and Conditions of service) Amendment Rules 2016 notified by the Respondents 1 and 2 for straight termination without enquiry as uncosntitutional and ultravires WP.No.4816 of 2017:- to call for the records on the file of the 1st Respondent in connection with the order of Modification in Ref.Mktg./ZD/20/2016 dated 23.07.2016 to Draft of Annexure III-C and also on the file of the 3rd respondent in connection with the orders passed by him in Ref: Sales/DOs date 18.01.
Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules 2009 and Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officer (Revision of Certain Terms and conditions of service) Amendment Rules 2016. Notified by the respondents 1 and 2 for straight termination without enquiry as unconstitution and ultravires.
For appellants : Mr.R.Singaravelan, Sr.Counsel for Mr.R.Jayaprakash For respondents : Mr.S.Silambanan, Sr.Counsel for M/s.Kaavya Silambanan Associates COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2.The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants, who are the officers in the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the cadre of Development Officer, have been served with show cause notice as to nonperformance of the target fixed by the respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India.
He is very particular about the word 'shall' used in the phrase 'why your services should not be terminated' and would contend that it is predetermined to terminate the services of the appellants/writ petitioners and when a similar argument was advanced before the Kerala High Court, the Kerala High Court held that the word 'may' should have been used rather the word 'should'. He would rely upon the decision in K.S.RAVINDRAN v. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ((2015) 7 SCC 222), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that termination of services straightaway imposing minor penalties first, on the ground of poor performance of the employee of the Insurance Company, is illegal.
3.Per contra, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents would contend that as against the judgment of the Kerala High court, LIC has moved SLP and obtained stay. He would further contend that the writ petitions have been filed only against the show cause notices and such filing of writ petitions challenging the show cause notices itself are not
maintainable.
4.Taking the same view, the learned Single Judge after going through the factual aspects of the case, disposed of the writ petitions.
5.On going through the materials available on record, we are of the view that since only show cause notices are challenged, we are not inclined to interfere with the same. However, in our considered view, the usage of the word 'should' will amount to pre-determination of the issue and it leads to the apprehension expressed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants. Therefore, such usage is hereby deprecated. 6.Further, nowadays, the LIC has been encouraging the online policies with technological developments. Therefore, it is high time for effecting necessary amendments with regard to the terms and conditions of service for the Development Officers in connection with their performance in securing the insurance policies.
7.Since the challenge in the present proceedings are only the show cause notices, without interfering with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we dispose of the writ appeals subject to the above observation. The explanation of the appellants would be considered on merits and in accordance with law complying with the principles of natural justice and also in the light of the decision in (2015) 7 SCC 222). No costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KM To:
1. The Chairman / the Executive Director, (Marketing/PD) Central Office, "Yogakshema", Mumbai-400 021.
2. The Zonal Officer, Southern Zonal Office, Old No.102, New No.153, LIC Building, Anna Salai, Mount Road, Chennai-2.
3. The Senior Divisional Manager, Salem Division, Salem.
4. The Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Post Box No.324, LIC Building, 153, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.
5. The Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Marketing Department, P.B.No.3810, India Life Building, Trichy Road, Coimbatore.
6. The Senior Divisional Manager, Sales Department, Divisional Office, "Jeevan Prakash", Arcot Road, Vellore-632 004.
7. The Senior Divisional Manager, Tirunelveli Division, 9-A, Punithavathiar Street, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.
+5ccs to Mr.R.Jayaprakash, Advocate, S.R.No.92374 to 92378 +1cc to M/s.Kaavya Silambanan Associates , S.R.No.92262 W.A.Nos.1777 to 1781 of 2017 and C.M.P.Nos.22533 to 22537 of 2017 CS/09/01/18