SHYAMAL KUMAR LODH Vs. VIJAYA BANK & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Subject matter of the three writ petitions being inter-related, those were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) However, for the sake of convenience, facts as narrated in WP(C) No. 1473/2014 may be referred to.

(3.) At the relevant point of time petitioner was serving as Clerk in the Vijaya Bank, Tinsukia Branch. On 24.08.1994, he was placed under suspension pending initiation of disciplinary proceeding. Though petitioner was placed under suspension he did not receive due subsistence allowance. This led to filing of a petition by the petitioner before the Labour Court, Dibrugarh seeking a direction to the Vijaya Bank authorities not to deduct salary of the petitioner beyond 50% and also to release the excess deduction already made. Said application was registered as Misc. Case No. 6/1995. Vijaya Bank authorities contested Misc. Case No. 6/1995 by filing objection contending that Labour Court, Dibrugarh had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue raised in Misc. Case No. 6/1995. Contention was that since the Vijaya Bank was a nationalised central bank, the appropriate Government would be the Central Government. Since the Labour Court at Dibrugarh was constituted by the State Government, therefore the said Labour Court lacked jurisdiction to decide the claim of the petitioner being an employee of a central bank. It appears that the Labour Court by order dated 19.08.1995 rejected the aforesaid contention of the Vijaya Bank authorities. This led to filing of Civil Rule No. 3735/1995 by the Vijaya Bank before this Court.