retired employee benefit in case of merger
This query is : Resolved
Querist : Anonymous
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist)
04 January 2011
If an employee of BRL working in bracket of 4th Pay Commission when he retired. The 5th pay Commission was due for the employee and was eligible for all benefit available as arrear Salary. The employee retires in the year 2002. The 5th Pay commission was due for the period frm 1997 to 2002. The BRl merged with sail from April 2007 wihout doing pay revision. The Sail now revised the salary of the present employee of Brl. Can the ex employee of BRl has any remedy available. Can they claim their arrear due of period from 1997 to 2002. Can a Company directly jump from 4th to 6th pay commission without giving any benefit to their ex employee after Merger.
04 January 2011
Its depend on compnay internal decesion, If the compnay is not in the position to pay arrears , Retired employee will not get any money.
In case arrear is paid to existing employee, all the employee working in that will be eligble for payments.
In case arrear is paid to existing employee, all the employee working in that will be eligble for payments.
Querist : Anonymous
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist)
07 January 2011
As we all know that sail is one of the profit making company and has a huge reserve. So Company is definetly in position to pay the arrear amount.
21 July 2025
In the scenario you've described — where a retired employee of BRL (a company later merged into SAIL) was due arrears from the 5th Pay Commission (1997–2002) but retired in 2002 before the merger in 2007 — the question of entitlement to arrears post-merger is legally and contractually nuanced. Here's a detailed view:
🔍 Key Considerations
1. Retirement Before Merger
The employee retired before the merger and before BRL implemented the 5th Pay Commission.
Once an employee retires, future benefits typically depend on company policy at the time of retirement, not what is decided post-retirement unless explicitly extended.
2. Merger Terms
The scheme of merger/amalgamation (approved by the court or relevant authority) determines:
Whether past employees will be entitled to retrospective benefits.
Whether SAIL inherits liabilities for unpaid dues like salary arrears or pension revisions of ex-BRL employees.
If the merger did not include retrospective liabilities, SAIL may not be obligated.
3. Implementation of Pay Revision by SAIL
If SAIL revised salaries only for existing employees of BRL, and not for retirees, then retirees may not automatically qualify.
But, if arrears for 1997–2002 were paid to existing employees, retirees may have a moral and legal ground to claim parity — especially if those arrears relate to a time when they were in service.
⚖️ Legal Position
You may explore the following remedies:
✅ RTI Application or HR Query
File an RTI application to SAIL (if a PSU) or write to HR/legal department requesting clarity on:
Whether ex-BRL retirees were considered for 5th Pay Commission arrears.
Copy of the merger terms.
✅ Representation via Retiree Associations
Many PSUs have retired employees’ welfare associations. Collective representations are often more impactful.
✅ Legal Recourse
If you have documentary proof that arrears were due but unpaid, you can explore:
Filing a writ petition in the High Court.
Raising a case under Industrial Disputes Act (if within limitation period, though tricky post-retirement).
⚠️ Can a Company Skip 5th Pay Commission and Implement 6th Directly?
Technically, yes — if:
The company never implemented the 5th Pay Commission officially.
It now implements the 6th Pay Commission on its own discretion post-merger.
But, skipping earlier revisions without settling arrears for a period when the employee was in service (i.e., 1997–2002) can be contested.
📝 Conclusion
If you (or the concerned retired employee):
Were in service during the 5th CPC period (1997–2002), and
Retired before implementation, and
Others received arrears for the same period,
Then you may have a claim, at least morally, and potentially legally — depending on the merger terms.
🔍 Key Considerations
1. Retirement Before Merger
The employee retired before the merger and before BRL implemented the 5th Pay Commission.
Once an employee retires, future benefits typically depend on company policy at the time of retirement, not what is decided post-retirement unless explicitly extended.
2. Merger Terms
The scheme of merger/amalgamation (approved by the court or relevant authority) determines:
Whether past employees will be entitled to retrospective benefits.
Whether SAIL inherits liabilities for unpaid dues like salary arrears or pension revisions of ex-BRL employees.
If the merger did not include retrospective liabilities, SAIL may not be obligated.
3. Implementation of Pay Revision by SAIL
If SAIL revised salaries only for existing employees of BRL, and not for retirees, then retirees may not automatically qualify.
But, if arrears for 1997–2002 were paid to existing employees, retirees may have a moral and legal ground to claim parity — especially if those arrears relate to a time when they were in service.
⚖️ Legal Position
You may explore the following remedies:
✅ RTI Application or HR Query
File an RTI application to SAIL (if a PSU) or write to HR/legal department requesting clarity on:
Whether ex-BRL retirees were considered for 5th Pay Commission arrears.
Copy of the merger terms.
✅ Representation via Retiree Associations
Many PSUs have retired employees’ welfare associations. Collective representations are often more impactful.
✅ Legal Recourse
If you have documentary proof that arrears were due but unpaid, you can explore:
Filing a writ petition in the High Court.
Raising a case under Industrial Disputes Act (if within limitation period, though tricky post-retirement).
⚠️ Can a Company Skip 5th Pay Commission and Implement 6th Directly?
Technically, yes — if:
The company never implemented the 5th Pay Commission officially.
It now implements the 6th Pay Commission on its own discretion post-merger.
But, skipping earlier revisions without settling arrears for a period when the employee was in service (i.e., 1997–2002) can be contested.
📝 Conclusion
If you (or the concerned retired employee):
Were in service during the 5th CPC period (1997–2002), and
Retired before implementation, and
Others received arrears for the same period,
Then you may have a claim, at least morally, and potentially legally — depending on the merger terms.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Regarding Appointment of auditor in case of casual vacancy
- GST- DRC 03 RCM Liability
- Query on managerial remuneration u/s 197 of CA 2013
- Conversion of Proprietorship Firm to Partnership Firm
- Updated return filing
- Validity of form 15 G and 15 H on Interest on fixed deposit
- Supply to unit situated in SEZ
- Temporary GST registration
- TDS AFTER SUBMISSION OF 15G OR H
- Additional income for updated return
- GSTR 1- Amend Credit Note
- Audit of F and O T/O
- EXCESS CREDIT REALTED GST REVERSAL
- Export invoice not reported
- CA Articleship Extension Matter
- GST OFFICER WRONG NOTICE
- "Please ensure that the Total of the Deductions u/s 54F match the same in Table D in Sch CG"
- Composition Dealer GST Annual Return Filing process
- Revision under Section 264 in The Income Tax Act, 1961
- TDS under section 195.
Trending Online Classes
CAclubindia
