HC slaps Rs 50k fine on LIC for frivolous appeals

Hyderabad: Finding fault with the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) for filing three frivolous appeals against a single judge order, the Telangana high court on Monday slapped costs of Rs 50,000 on LIC and warned that any failure to pay the fine would result in a fresh contempt case against the corporation.

The issue pertains to 50 unfilled vacancies of class IV jobs. LIC filled nearly 400 such posts in 2012 through two notifications. However, 50 posts remained not filled because some successful candidates preferred not to join the service and had foregone the offer. Those next to them in the merit list were asking the authorities to grant them these jobs as they are eligible to get them in the selection process. When that was not happening, ‘the next in line 50 candidates’ approached the high court seeking direction to the LIC to appoint them in those unfilled posts. They came in three batches and filed three petitions.

Even before the single judge could adjudicate, the LIC itself had made an offer assuring the court that it would consider employment to all the aspirants if they make a fresh representation to the authorities. Recording this assurance, the single judge closed the plea asking the corporation to consider the cases of the petitioners. However, LIC ignored the representation and went back on its promise. The aggrieved aspirants filed a contempt case against the corporation officers. Sensing trouble, the LIC has preferred an appeal against the order of the single judge and filed three appeals.

A bench of Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B Vijaysen Reddy told the LIC counsel that the corporation filed these appeals only to escape from the contempt case filed by the aggrieved aspirants whose dream of an LIC job remained unfulfilled even after an order from the single judge. The LIC itself had assured them before a single judge that it would consider their cases if they make fresh representation. Despite making the fresh representation, the corporation had failed to keep its promise. The LIC counsel argued before the CJ bench that none of the 50 candidates was in the zone of consideration and hence they cannot be hired.

The panel’s term expired in 2014 itself because it had a limited shelf life of two years. “The LIC realised the gravity of its folly and just to escape from the clutches of the contempt case, it preferred an appeal against the single judge order,” the bench said. The bench reminded the LIC that the order of the single judge merely recorded the assurance given by the LIC and hence it suffers from no legal infirmities. The bench also brushed aside the shelf life theories of LIC because they were never raised before the single judge and hence cannot raise such fresh grounds in an appeal. “This is misuse of court process,” the bench told LIC.