JOSEPH A A Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant/petitioner, an Ex service man, while working as Armed Guard in the Panampilly Nagar Branch of the respondent Bank, was prosecuted on the allegation that he has stolen a signed blank cheque of a customer of the Bank and then used it for his own purpose and he was convicted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. He was suspended by Ext. P2 memo dated 851996. He was dismissed from service by Ext. P3 order dated 181997 as he was convicted in the criminal case. No departmental enquiry was conducted against him. By Ext. P4 appellate judgment dated 491997, he was acquitted. He made several representations like Ext. P5 and P6 to the Management for reinstatement. On 321998 by Ext. P7 memo he was informed that it was decided by the Management to reinstate him in service without pay and allowances for the intervening period and he was asked to await posting. Thereafter, he was posted only on 1821998 by Ext. P8. He rejoined service and by Ext. P9 representation dated 641998 he requested for backwages. Since that was rejected, he approached this Court for backwages. The learned Single Judge accepted the submission of the counsel for the Bank that bipartite settlement did not provide payment of backwages for the above period and held that he is not entitled for backwages. The above finding is challenged before us.

(2.) According to the counsel for the appellant he was acquitted by the criminal court after having found that he is not guilty of the offence. In Ext. P4 there is a clear finding that prosecution did not prove the case, that it was a cooked up story and the accused was made as a scapegoat and that there is no evidence to support the case of the prosecution. In the above circumstances, it is the submission of the appellant that he was illegally denied employment for a long period and he is entitled to backwages for the same. The learned counsel for the Bank again reiterated that provisions of the bipartite settlement did not give him a right to get backwages for that period. It is also submitted that since he has rejoined duty without making protest, he is not entitled to claim backwages. Now we will consider the relevant clauses in the bipartite settlement.

(3.) Clause 19.3(c) and (d) are the relevant provisions, which are as follows: