KANCHEEPURAM CENTRAL COOP. BANK LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANCHEEPURAM Vs. THE SECOND ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, MADRAS AND E. MUNUSWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the Award of the Second Additional Labour Court, Madras, dated 26 -8 -93 made in I.D.No. 46 of 89, Kancheepuram Central Co -operative Bank Limited has filed the above writ petition to quash the same on various grounds.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder: The second respondent herein was employed as Junior Supervisor/Secretary in the Maduramangalam Agricultural Credit Society. He was transferred and posted as Secretary in Medur Agricultural Cooperative Society by proceedings dated 17 -4 -85. However, the second respondent did not report for duty at the new place. On the other hand, he applied for leave for 2 months by letter dated 24 -4 -85. Even thereafter, he did not report for duty but extended the leave from time to time upto 15 -7 -86. In view of the service regulations in the petitioner bank, the Bank directed the 2nd respondent to obtain and produce medical certificate and fitness certificate from the District Medical Officer. The 2nd respondent neither complied with the direction of the petitioner bank nor turned up for duty, but on the other hand, continued to stay away from duty. Therefore, the petitioner Bank relying upon the bye -law No.44 (8) (ix) ordered for the removal of the name of the 2nd respondent from the rolls of the petitioner bank by proceedings dated 18 -9 -86. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the second respondent raised an industrial dispute, which resulted in I. D.No. 46/89 before the first respondent herein. Before the Labour Court, the workman got himself examined as W.W.1 and marked Exs. W -1 to W -7. On the other hand, on the side of the Management, two witnesses were examined as M.Ws.1 and 2 and Exs. M -1 to M -37 were marked in support of their defence. The Labour Court after framing necessary issues and after holding that the termination is not in accordance with law and Bye -laws of the Bank, ordered reinstatement with service benefits as well as back wages from 19 -9 -86. Against the said award, the Bank has preferred the above writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as second respondent.