SURESH CHATURVEDI Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the award dated 27.1.1987, passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal in respect of ID No.70/1984. The terms of reference for adjudication were as below:-

(2.) After hearing the parties, the question that was decided by the Tribunal was as to whether an `Adarsh Agent' employed by a bank to mobilize deposit is a "workman" as defined in Section 8 (e) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter in short referred to as `the Act'), and whether the relationship of such "Adarsh Agents" with the bank is that of an "employee" and "employer" or an "agent" and "principal". After hearing the parties, the award was answered against the petitioner/claimant. It was held that the petitioner was not covered by the definition of "workman" in Section 8 (e) of the Act and it was a case of termination of "contract for service" and not a "contract of service".

(3.) During the pendency of the writ petition, the Supreme Court has adjudicated the said issue in the matter of Indian Banks Association Versus Workmen of Syndicate Banks and Ors. reported as II (2001) SLT 280, wherein it was held as below:-