R.T.JANJVADIA Vs. STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PER <DJG>H.K.RATHOD</DJG>, J. - 1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. I.S. Supehia for petitioner, learned Advocate Mr. Sandeep Bhatt for respondent No.1 and Mr. Sameer J. Dave for respondent No.2.

(2.) RULE . Service of rule is waived by the learned Advocate Mr. Sandeep Bhatt on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. Sameer Dave on behalf of respondent No.2. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, this matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate Mr. Supehia submits that the decision taken by respondent No.2 amounts to deciding the merits of the matter. Mr. Supehia further submitted that the respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction or power to examine merits of the matter or to adjudicate industrial dispute raised by concerned workman. He further submits that such powers are with the Labour Courts/Industrial Tribunals while exercising powers under Section 10(1) of the I.D. Act, 1947. In support of his submissions, learned Advocate Mr. I.S. Supehia has placed reliance on the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in case of Telco Convoy Drivers Mazdoor Sangh and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in AIR 1989 SC 1565.