PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK LIMITED Vs. K L KHARBANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave in an industrial matter. The respondent Kharbanda is a supervisor in the Punjab National Bank Limited which is the appellant before us. The dispute relates to the fixation of his salary in accordance with the All- India Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes) Award (hereinafter referred to as the Sastry award). The respondent made an application to the Central Labour Court, Delhi, under S. 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, No. XIV of 1947, (hereinafter called the Act), and his case was that he was entitled to certain benefits capable of being computed in terms of money under the Sastry award, but the appellant had made a wrong calculation in fixing his basic salary. Therefore, the respondent prayed that the benefit to which he was entitled by fixation of his basic salary correctly should be computed in terms of money and determined by the labour court. His case further was that when his basic salary was rightly fixed under the Sastry award he would be entitled to a sum of Rs.6,428.28 nP. as arrears up to the date of his application.

(2.) The application was opposed on behalf of the appellant and two contentions were raised to meet the case put forward by the respondent. In the first place it was urged that the application was not maintainable under S. 33-C (2) of the Act and the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to decide it. Secondly, it was urged that the manner in which the appellant had fixed the basic salary was correct and there was therefore no force in the contention of the respondent that he was entitled to certain benefits of which he had been deprived and which should be calculated by the labour court.

(3.) Before we deal with the two points which arise in the present appeal we may refer to the provisions of the Sastry award out of which the present dispute arises. Originally another tribunal known as the Sen tribunal was appointed in June 1949 to go into the disputes between various banks all over the country and their employees. The Sen tribunal made an award after an exhaustive inquiry but on appeal to this Court the said award was set aside in 1951. Thereafter Act II of 1951 was passed as a temporary measure for freezing certain provisions of the said award an order to prevent the spread of the prevalent unrest amongst the bank employees in question. The said dispute was then referred by the Central Government to the Sastry tribunal in January 1952. This tribunal held an elaborate inquiry and made its award which was published on April 20,1953. Appeals were preferred by the banks and their employees against the said award before the Labour Appellate Tribunal substantially confirmed the recommendations and directions of the Sastry tribunal with certain modifications. In the present appeal, we are not concerned with the further history of the dispute, for it is admitted that the provisions of the Sastry award with respect to the matter in controversy before us have remained unmodified when finally the dispute was set at rest by the Industrial Disputes (Banking Companies) Decision Act, (No. XLI of 1955).