CHIEF MANAGER Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the award made in I.D. No. 357 of 2004, dated 23.2.2010, the Chief Manager, Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd., Karur has filed the present writ petition. Record of proceedings shows that the litigation has started in the year 2004, and the award passed earlier by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Chennai, dated 22.8.2006, directing the bank to reinstate the petitioner with backwages has been set aside by this Court in W.P. (MD). No. 9076 of 2006 dated 15.2.2008 and that I.D. No. 357 of 2004 has been remanded back to the Presiding Officer of Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai, to allow the petitioner bank to adduce additional evidence, justifying the action of the bank, in not allowing the petitioner to rejoin the bank, afford sufficient opportunity to the workman and to pass orders on merits, and in accordance with law. Thus, it is the second round of litigation between the parties.

(2.) Facts deduced from the materials on record is that the second respondent was a clerk in Lakshmi Village Bank, at Kandhili Branch, Thiruppathru Taluk. His services were terminated with effect from 26.2.1994. Challenging the termination, he had raised an industrial dispute which has been referred to the first respondent. The first respondent which took up the Industrial dispute as I.D. No. 357 of 2004 and by award dated 22.8.2006 held that the termination of the workman herein, was not justified and that as the workman had not adduced any evidence regarding his gainful employment, the Tribunal has directed reinstatement of the second respondent/workman, in service, with continuity of service and all other attendant benefits with 50% of the backwages while ordering reinstatement. The first respondent Tribunal has also observed that there was no prohibition for initiating departmental action against the second respondent/workman.

(3.) Challenging the award, the petitioner has filed W.P. No. 9076 of 2006 and this Court, by an order dated 15.2.2008, set aside the award and remanded the matter back to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai, with a direction to allow the petitioner bank to adduce additional evidence justifying the action of the bank, afford sufficient opportunity to the workman and to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.