KANNAN S Vs. DY COMMR OF LABOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue in all the matters is one and the same and interconnected, they are being disposed of by the following common order. Writ Appeal No. 911 of 1991 is filed against the order of the learned single Judge, dated February 8, 1981, made in Writ Petition No. 9124 of 1997. Writ Appeal No. 1250 of 1991 is filed against the order of the very same learned Judge, dated August 23, 1991 made in W.M.P.No. 14055 of 1991 in Writ Petition No. 9124 of 1987, in and by which, the learned Judge clarified his order, dated February 8, 1991. Contempt Appeal No. 15 of 1992 is against the order passed in Contempt Application No. 464 of 1992, dated December 2, 1992, holding the respondent therein/Deputy General Manager, Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., guilty of contempt of the order, dated February 8, 1991 read with clarificatory order, dated August 23, 1991. For the convenience, we' shall refer the parties as arrayed in Writ Appeal No. 911 of 1991.

(2.) The admitted facts are as follows: The appellant joined services of the Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur, second respondent in Writ Appeal No. 95 of 1991 and appellant in Writ Appeal No. 1250 of 1991 as a clerk in the year 1959. He was promoted as Cashier (II Officer) in the year 1962. On September 13, 1976 on transfer he assumed charge as the Branch Manager of Royapuram branch and thereafter he was transferred on March 24, 1981 to Kozhikode branch of the second respondent-bank. On June 25, 1982 the appellant was issued a charge-sheet for certain irregularities committed in Royapuram branch. On July 24, 1982 he submitted his explanation denying all the charges. An enquiry officer was appointed on December 31, 1982. During the enquiry proceedings that is on April 9, 1983, according to the appellant, the enquiry officer and the presenting officer informed him that if he accepts the charges, a minor punishment would be imposed. He conveyed his decision and requested the enquiry officer to view the matter leniently and impose punishment, if any, other than capital punishment. On March 25, 1985 he was given a show-cause notice regarding the proposed punishment of dismissal. On April 25, 1985, the appellant was dismissed from service. On April 26, 1985 he preferred an appeal to the General Manager, appellate authority of the bank. On May 28, 1985, the appellate authority rejected his appeal, however, recommended for fresh appointment, if he applied for. Pursuant to said communication, the appellant on June 3, 1985 applied for fresh appointment in the officer cadre. On October 14, 1985 the bank rejected the appellant's claim for re appointment. Against the order of the appellate authority (General Manager), the appellant filed a review petition on November 14, 1985 before the Board of Directors of the bank and, according to him, the same had not been disposed of. On March 12, 1986 he preferred an appeal under Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 as T.S.E. No. 12 of 1986 before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeal), Madras. The appellate authority, by order, dated June 11, 1987, dismissed the said appeal. Against the dismissal of the appeal filed under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 9124 of 1987 before this Court on September 14, 1987.

(3.) The second respondent-bank has filed a counter affidavit disputing various averments made by the petitioner. By order, dated February 8, 1991, the learned single Judge disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the second respondent bank to offer him (writ-petitioner) fresh employment in a category immediately below Officers Grade within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of that order as per the observations made by the appellate authority (General Manager). Against the said order, the second respondent-bank filed Writ Appeal No. 243/1991 and the same was dismissed by the Division Bench on March 14, 1991. Against the very same order of the learned single Judge, the appellant herein also preferred an appeal in Writ Appeal No. 911 of 1991 on March 26, 1991 and the same has been admitted by the Bench of this Court. It is further seen that on May 15, 1991 the bank offered clerical post to the appellant instead of Officers' Scale I as per the order in W.P.No. 9124 of 1987. Thereafter, the appellant filed W.M.P.No. 14055 of 1991 on June 10, 1991 for clarification. In his order, dated August 23, 1991, the learned Judge has clarified that inasmuch as the petitioner was holding the Scale II Grade in the Officers Grade, the offer of the employment should be only in the Scale I category in the Officers Grade. Meanwhile the bank sent a letter of appointment on September 14, 1991 imposing numerous conditions. On receipt of the letter of the appointment, the appellant sent a legal notice on September 18, 1991 to the bank, drawing their attention to the clarificatory order and their disobedience. The appellant has also filed Contempt Application No. 464 of 1992 against the bank on September 30, 1991. The bank has also filed Writ Appeal No. 1250 of 1991 on October 7, 1991 against the order in W.M.P.No. 14055 of 1991 in W.P.No. 9124 of 1987. Though the writ appeal was entertained by the Bench, by order, dated November 6, 1991 the Division Bench dismissed their stay petition C.M.P. No. 13434 of 1991. On December 4, 1991 the appellant died in a road accident. In the Contempt Application No. 464 of 1992, dated December 2, 1992, after considering the rival claim, the learned single Judge found the respondent therein/Deputy General Manager of the bank guilty of contempt, and also directed the bank to pay the petitioners (appellant's legal representatives) the arrears of pay from August 24, 1991 till December 4, 1991 (date of death of appellant-S. Kannan) on the time-scale of pay Scale I Officer with all allowances on or before December 31, 1992. Against the said order, the bank preferred Contempt Appeal No. 15 of 1992 on December 21, 1992. In view of the death of the appellant in a road accident, his legal representatives were brought on record as appellants 2 to 5 as per order in C.M.P. No. 1430 of 1992, dated July 29,1992, by the Division Bench of this Court.