GANPATI YESU KADAM Vs. MUNICIPAL CO-OP BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order dated 30th August, 2011 of the Industrial Court, Mumbai dismissing the complaint of the petitioner alleging unfair labour practices within the meaning of Item No. 9, Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the MRTU and PULP Act").

(2.) The respondents contested the complaint on merit, as well as, on the ground of it's maintainability. According to them, the petitioner is not an employee within the meaning under Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 as it existed at the time of filing of the complaint. As such he could not have resorted to any remedy under the Act. On merits, the respondents contended that the petitioner did not fulfill the condition of Clause 28 of the settlement. He has not graduated in any of the subjects specified under the clause i.e. Economics, Maths, Banking, Accounts and Statistics. The Industrial Court upheld both the contentions of the respondents to dismiss the complaint.

(3.) As stated in the petition itself, the petitioner has been promoted as "Junior Officer in the year 1990." Later on w.e.f. 21st October, 2005 he came to be promoted as "Branch Manager". Thus, on the date of execution of the agreement dated 4th July, 1992 he was already working as a "Junior Officer". The definition of "employee" as given in the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, as it existed in the year 2002 reads as follows: