L BHOJAN Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the first and second respondents to implement the wage revision as per the settlement, dated 21. 2. 1997, entered into between the management of the first respondent Bank and the employees association, under Section 12 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(3.) IT has been stated that the petitioner had joined the services of the first respondent Bank in the year 1967 as a Group Clerk. Later, he was promoted to the various posts and at the time of the filing of the present writ petition, he was holding the post of Assistant Manager. While so, the petitioner had gone on leave and thereafter, the leave was extended on medical grounds. However, a charge memo, dated 16. 7. 96 and a suspension order, dated 12. 7. 96, were served on the petitioner by the Manager (Personnel), on 18. 7. 96. While the petitioner was on medical leave. The allegations levelled against the petitioner in the charge memo, dated 16. 7. 96, were false, frivolous and without any basis. The petitioner had been charged for misappropriating the funds of the first respondent Bank, while he was working as a Senior Assistant at the Head Office of the first respondent bank at Udhagamandalam. In spite of a detailed explanation submitted by the petitioner, a domestic enquiry had been conducted against him. The said enquiry was not conducted in a fair and proper manner and it had been conducted without following the principles of natural justice. Based on the findings of the enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service by an order, dated 24. 4. 97. Challenging the said order, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore, the appellate authority, under Section 40 (1) of the Tamilnadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947. The said appeal had been numbered as TNSEA No. 4 of 1997 and the said appeal is still pending on the file of the appellate authority.