LAWS(MAD)-1982-7-29

SECRETARY AND TREASURER THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE Vs. P MUTHUKRISHNAN

Decided On July 16, 1982
SECRETARY AND TREASURER THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE Appellant
V/S
P MUTHUKRISHNAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of the judgment of Sathiadev J. , in Writ Petition No. 2384 of 1976.

(2.) WRIT Petition No. 2384 of 1976 was filed by one P. Muthukrishnan to quash the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras , passed in I. D. No. 43 of 1974 dated 20th December, 1975. In I. D. No. 43 of 1974 the Industrial Tribunal took up for decision the reference made by the Central Government relating to the discharge of the said Muthukrishnan from the services of the State Bank of india.

(3.) MR. Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for muthukrishnan contended that the conduct of the enquiry was vitiated since the staff Superintendent had no authority to frame the charges against muthukrishnan and that there was discrimination in awarding the punishment to muthukrishnan MR. Ramachandran fairly stated that these were the two points he would raise in the appeal filed by his client. As regards the contention of MR. M. R. Narayanaswamy learned counsel appearing for the Bank MR. Ramachandran said that when he pleads that the discharge from service itself is wrong, it cannot be taken that Muthukrishnan had not pleaded for lesser punishment. The learned counsel pointed out to the stand taken by Muthukrishnan at various stages wherein he has asked for the imposition of a lesser punishment. In order to substantiate that it is only a minor misconduct on the part of muthukrishnan, MR. Ramachandran took us through various facts in this case as establishing that there was no fraud or collusien as between Muthukrishnan and others who have encashed the cheques in question. According to the learned counsel, the Bank has not proved, fraud on the part of Muthukrishnan in this case, and to this effect, Sathiadev, J. , has given a finding Finally, the learned, counsel submitted that under section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes act the Tribunal has ample power to impose a lesser punishment on the delinquent concerned.