STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (CENTRAL)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by State Bank of India invoking the certiorarial jurisdiction of this Court to quash the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in I.S. No. 121 dated 10.11.1981.

(2.) One Deep Chand was originally employed by the Bank on 18.3.1974 as Badli workman i.e. whenever a relief arrangement has to be made the services of the workman are pressed into service. Thereafter, on 16.5.1974, the said Deep Chand was appointed as a temporary chowkidar of the bank for a period of 16 days w.e.f. 16.51974 to 31.5.1974. Thereafter his services were extended from 1.6.1974 to 30.7.1974. Meanwhile, the Bank held interviews for recruiting some other workmen on 30th June, 1974. Deep Chand also appeared in the interview but his case was not considered on the ground that his name was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange and he has also not completed 90 days of service with the Bank so as to enable him to get the benefit of the provision in the agreement entered into by the Bank with its staff association. Consequently, the service of Deep Chand were terminated on 1-8-1974, but he was again temporarily appointed in November, 1974. The workman Deep Chand challenged his termination w.e.f. 1.8.1974 and raised an Industrial dispute. Then the matter was referred to Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh. On receipt of the reference the Industrial Tribunal framed two issues and on the basis of the evidence on record, the Labour Court held that the action of the Bank in terminating the services of Deep Chand was not justified and he is entitled to the service on regular basis and also entitled to full back wages.

(3.) Challenging the said award dated 10-11-1981, the Bank filed this writ petition. It is pertinent to note that though the services of Deep Chand were terminated w.e.f. 1-8-1974, he has been re-employed in November, 1974 itself. Since then, admittedly he has been working continuously till today. Therefore, said Deep Chand has been in the service of the (Bank) for nearly twenty one years. Therefore, there is no question to throw him out at this stage by setting aside the award.