CHARTERED BANK Vs. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CALCUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts in this case are shortly as follows: the petitioner carries on the business of banking inter alia at No. 4, Netaji Subhas Road, Calcutta and also has a sub-branch at Chowringhee. On or about May/june 1961 the petitioner decided to appoint some new Assistant Officers at the Chowringhee sub-branch. A notice dated 2nd June, 1961 was is-sued inviting applications for appointment to these posts, from amongst its existing clerical staff possessing the qualifications set out in the notice. As a result of such notice, the petitioner received thirty applications from its existing clerical staff. From amongst the applicants, four persons were selected and appointedn. C. Manna, P. G. Dey and P. K. Bhattacharya as Assistant officers with a probationary period of six months and A. K. Sen Gupta as an Assistant officer with a probationary period of five years. With these persons, the bank has entered into agreements, copies whereof are included in annexure 'a' to the petition. Thereafter, Respondents Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 raised a dispute about the appointment of the aforesaid persons to the posts of Assistant officers, claming inter alia to be better qualified for appointment to the said posts. They also raised the contention that by appointing the above named four persons the bank had superseded the said respondents and such super session was done under motivation of victimization and favoritism and was in violation of the provisions of paragraph 529 of an award made pursuant to a reference made by the Central Government by Notification No. SR 036 dated 5th January, 1952. popularly known as, and hereinafter referred to, as the "sastry Award". Thereafter, conciliation proceedings were started before the Conciliation Officer (Central) who published a report dated 14th December, 1961, stating that conciliation efforts had failed. Upon perusal of the report, the Government of India did not consider f tie dispute as a fit one to be referred for adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act. Sometime thereafter, however, and the reason is not very evident, an order was made on the 20th July, 1962 referring an industrial dispute for adjudication by the Central Government Tribunal in Calcutta, for determination of the following issue:

(2.) THE respondent No. 1 heard the matter and made an award on the 27th February, 1963. A copy of the award is annexed to the petition and marked with the letter "b". It was held that the super session of K. G. Das, R. W. Nandy, K. N. Chakravarty and A. Mukherjee by the appointment of A. K. Sen Gupta was not justified. It was further held that the super session of K. G. Das by appointing P. G. De and P. K. Bhattacharya was also not justified. It was directed that K. G. Das should be appointed as an Assistant officer in the place of A. K. Sen Gupta and that A. K. Sen Gupta should not be continued as an Assistant Officer unless all clerks senior to him and who are qualified and fit are promoted as Assistant Officers. It was directed that K. G. Das should be paid his salary on the basis as if he was an Assistant Officer with effect from the date on which P. G. De, P. K. Bhattacharya and A. K. Sen Gupta took over as Assistant Officers. In this application the said award is challenged.

(3.) BEFORE I consider the award and the grounds upon which it is challenged, it will be necessary to state some other facts. The question of making certain appointments as Assistant Officers in the Chowringhee branch of the petitioner Bank had been raised since 1960. Certain correspondence had between the Bank and its head office at London, are annexed to the affidavit of I. G. Thomson affirmed on the 15th January, 1964. These were also placed before the tribunal. Annexure 'f' shows that on the 15th February, 1961 Mr. Thomson, Manager of the Bank, was writing to the London head-office stating that upon inspection of the Chowringhee sub-branch he was advised that if the volume of savings accounts business continued to increase as it was doing, it would be necessary to appoint an additional Probationary Assistant. He was informed that, over the past year the volume of business at the Chowringhee sub-branch had increased considerably; the number of savings deposit accounts had risen by over 3000, and the average number of vouchers processed daily showed an increase of 26 p. c. As a result, the two covenanted officers at the sub-branch had found it difficult to give to their constituents their personal attention and time which was so necessary if this expansion was to continue. It was recommended that the establishment of the sub-branch should be strengthened by the appointment of an Assistant Officer, who would relieve the covenanted officers of a portion of their routine duties. Finally, it was pointed out that at the Chowringhee sub-branch there was a young man by the name of Asok Kumar Sen Gupta, who was"most suitable for promotion to the rank of probationary assistant". Approval was asked for his appointment as a probationary assistant. Sanction was also asked for the appointment of several other assistants. The London head-office approved of the step. On the 2nd June, 1961 the petitioner issued a notice calling for applications from suitable members of the clerical staff for appointment as Assistant officers. The notice inter-alia stated as follows: