(1.) Interference declined by the learned single Judge repelling the challenge raised against the common award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court [hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'] granting relief to the workmen represented by the Union is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals preferred by the management/employer Bank.
(2.) The first respondent workers in the appeals were serving in two different branches of the appellant Bank [Kadavanthara and Valappad respectively] as temporary part time employees' from 1992/1995 onwards, for different duration. Despite the long spell of engagement as above, no steps were taken by the employer Bank to have their service regularized; virtually without any regard to the guidelines formulated by the Bank regarding recruitment. As per the recruitment norms, in the case of 'temporary part time employees' [particularly clause (e) of Ext. P7 recruitment rules], it was not necessary for the Bank to report vacancies to the employment exchange and discretion was vested with the Deputy General Manager to appoint such persons having long service against regular vacancies. The said workers by name D.S. Mohini and K.G. Sulochana were denied the benefit and the Bank was allegedly adopting pick and choose policy and has been giving appointment on regular basis to other similarly situated part time workers [working in 4 different branches namely - Kodungallur, Kunnamkulam, Thrissur and Ollur], which was cited as an instance of arbitrariness and discrimination. Met with the situation, the issue was taken up by the Trade Union representing the workmen and ultimately, the matter was got referred for adjudication before the Tribunal by the appropriate Government.
(3.) The issue referred for adjudication was;