Hyundai India sells 3,000 vehicles, extends government employee scheme

Hyundai extends the special scheme for the state and central government employees till November 2008.
Model wise discount on ex-showroom price :

Santro Non AC	Rs.17,000
Santro GL/GLS	Rs.22,000
i10	Rs.10,000
Getz 1.1	Rs.22,000
Getz 1.3	Rs.27,000
Accent Executive	Rs.12,000
Verna (Petrol & Diesel)	Rs.31,000

'Employer cannot dictate the uniform linen': HC

Chennai, Nov 5: Asserting that an employer cannot dictate the type of material to be used for uniform, the Madras High Court today set aside a order by the Chennai Airport directing a woman employee to use only the dress prescribed by the Airports Authority while on duty.

Allowing a writ petition by a senior Office Assistant S Kasthuri in 1999, who used khadi/handloom material instead of silk while maintaining the colour prescribed by the airport, Justice K Chandru said the airport had the power to prescribe a uniform and even indicate the colour and shade of material one should wear but it cannot not dictate on the type of linen.

Silk and synthetic material prescribed were neither suited to our country nor did it reflect the ethos of the independence movement, he said.

"Rather than appreciating the principle stand taken by the petitioner, it is unthinkable that the respondent should come up with an unjustified reference to a so-called service regulation," the Judge said, adding that Article 51 A (b) of the Constitution clearly stipulated that a citizen of the Union had a duty to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired the freedom struggle.

He directed the Chennai Airport to pay Kasthuri Rs 5,000 as costs.

Kasthuri was appointed as a junior clerk in 1973 in the office of Director General of Civil Aviation. In 1989, she was made an employee of AAI and subsequently redesignated as senior office assistant. Since 1994 the employees were made to wear silk or polyster sarees.

The petitioner who used khadi/ handloom cotton dresses and khadi chappals was told in August 1996 to attend office in the prescribed uniform.

Kasthuri, inspired by life and principles of Mahatma Gandhi right from her childhood, contended that she neither collected her uniform sarees nor claimed any allowance in lieu of it. - Agencies

Courtesy_
http://news.chennaionline.com

Implementing new pay scale prerogative of employer: SC

The Supreme Court on Friday said that it is the prerogative of the government to implement revised pay scale for employees. There is no legal right vested in employees to claim implementation of revised pay scale, the apex court said.

“The question as to whether the scale of pay would be revised or not is a matter of policy decision for the state. No legal right exists in a person to get a revised pay scale implemented. It may be recommended by a body but ultimately it has to be accepted by the employer or by the state that bears the financial burden,” a bench comprising Justice S B Sinha and Justice Cyriac Joseph said.

The court dismissed the appeal of an employee who had resigned from the service of a PSU but claimed arrears which accrued due to the retrospective implementation of the revised pay scale by the government. The appellant, Mr A K Chandrashekar, was employed as finance director in an PSU of the Kerala government. He had resigned from service on May 23, 1995.

Subsequently, the Government of India issued an office memorandum (OM), on July 19, 1995, revising scales of pay for `executives holding board level posts’ with effect from January 1, 1992. In January, 1996, the appellant made a representation requesting payment of arrears on the ground that he was in service on January 1, 1992, and was entitled to the benefit of the OM of 1995.

It was, however, rejected by the state government. It had said that the OM of 1995 issued by the secretary to the Government of India directing the revision of scales of pay of scheduled posts effective from Jan 1, 1992, specifically contains a clause that all the administrative ministries/ departments are required to issue presidential directives to the concerned public sector enterprises under its administrative control to give effect to the revision.

The industries department of the BPE of Kerala government has not issued any specific directive to the PSU for making the revision effective. “Hence, we are unable to consider your request,” the government said. Another representation of the appellant drew a similar fate. The appellant then approached the Kerala high court. The HC had dismissed the plea of the appellant.

Courtesy_
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com