LAWS(P&H)-2014-2-334

RAJINDER KUMAR CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

Decided On February 13, 2014
Rajinder Kumar Chaudhary Appellant
V/S
STATE BANK OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.6.2010 (Annexure P -10) whereby the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court -I, Chandigarh has dismissed the application of the workman under Section 33 -C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for commutation of certain amount on the ground that an earlier application had been filed which was decided on 16.12.2004. Accordingly, it was held that once the petitioner has filed application for commutation of amount of similar nature which was claimed in the previous application, rest of the benefits shall be deemed to be waived under Order 2 Rule 2 and also barred by Explanation (IV) of Section 11 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

(2.) AFTER hearing the counsels for the parties and on a perusal of the paper -book, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 16.6.2010 is not justified. The reasons are apparent on the face of it since apparently a fresh cause of action has arisen to the workman. If the record is examined, it would be clear that in his first application (Annexure P -1) which was filed on 22.1.2003, the workman was agitating that he was not paid the arrears of wages increased on the basis of 5th Wage Settlement arrived at between the association and the Bank and the increased subsistence allowance. The prayer clause in the application dated 22.1.2003 filed under Section 33 -C(2) of the Act reads as under: -

(3.) THAT the aforesaid application was decided on 16.12.2004 as the management undertook to pay the said allowances. However, thereafter the workman was acquitted on 28.11.2006 since an FIR had been lodged against him on 25.9.1990 and certain rights pertaining to the amount payable during his suspension period had accrued to the workman as per the rules framed in pursuance of the Bipartite Settlement renewed from time to time which are reproduced by the respondent no.1 in its written statement. The relevant Rules read as under: -