UNION BANK OF INDIA Vs. VINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution partly assails the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 07.01.2020 to the extent Tribunal directed reinstatement of workman with 30% backwages and other benefits.

(2.) Shri S.K. Rao, learned senior counsel for the petitioners at the threshold made it clear that he is not challenging the award on merits, indeed the employer has confined its attack to the extent 30% backwages have been granted.

(3.) The relevant facts which have given rise to the industrial dispute referred by the appropriate government to the Tribunal on 03.12.2012 were that the respondent-workman was an employee of Sidhi Branch of the Bank between 1993 to 2009. The widow of a pensioner -Smt. Urmila Devi preferred a complaint before the Bank stating she did not withdraw her pension from her pension account for last two years. She came to know in November, 2009 during her visit to the Branch that pension has been withdrawn by the workman in connivance with the other persons. The employer placed the workman under suspension and instituted a departmental inquiry. It was alleged that the workman acted prejudicial to the interest of the Bank which amounts to gross negligence involving serious loss to the Bank, willful damage to the property of customers of the Bank, breach of rule of business of the Bank and instructions for running the department. The additional charge was also added. The Inquiry Officer found the charges as proved. The Disciplinary Authority inflicted the punishment of "dismissal without notice". Aggrieved, the respondent-workman filed an appeal which was also dismissed. This punishment became subject matter of industrial dispute. Reference made to the Tribunal reads as under: