CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of challenge in this writ petition is the award dated 23.10.1998 passed by the Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Kolkata against reference No. 23 of 1997 wherein the writ petitioner bank was respondent. The reference was made by the Central Government by order No. L-120I2/191/96/IR(B-II) dated 20/24-06-97, in exercise of its power under section 10(1)(d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The dispute referred before the Tribunal for adjudication reads as follows:

(2.) The brief facts of this case is that Sri Nirmal Kumar Mondal, who joined as peon in the bank on 15.06.1983, was posted at bank's Regional office at Durgapur. His annual increment used to fall due in June every year while he was working in subordinate cadre. His basic pay was Rs. 1050/- per month as peon on the date of his promotion to clerical cadre as per 5th bipartite settlement. He was promoted as clerk on and from 01.10.1991 and posted at Midnapore branch of the bank and consequentially his annual increment was reckoned from June every year in terms of the promotion policy agreement. Fitment in the scale of pay of the said workman, Sri Nirmal Kumar Mondal was made at Rs. 1225/- whereas the scale of pay of one Sri A.B. Majhi, who was junior to him and joined as peon on 31.03.1984, was fixed at Rs. 1225/- although his basic pay on promotion as clerk was Rs. 1015/-.

(3.) The respondent No. 5, being the workman, was aggrieved and dissatisfied with such fitment of his pay on promotion on the basic pay of Rs. 1225/- resulting an anomalous position. According to the workman, he is getting lesser pay for three consecutive months of March, April and May every year than his junior Sri Majhi. The concerned workman made a written complaint to the bank's Regional office at Durgapur in respect of the anomalous fixation of his pay on promotion. However, a, dispute was raised and refused before the tribunal. Tribunal after hearing passed award in favour of the workman. On behalf of the workman the Union contended that the workman should have been fitted at Rs. 1300/- in conformity of clause 24-12 of central office circular No. CO:PRS:IRP:96-97:10 dated 25.04.96 and also the management should give effect of such revised pay of Rs. 1300/- with effect from 01.10.91.