RAM PRASAD SAHA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dtd. 30/3/2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16752 of 2015, by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the said petition preferred by the original writ petitioner-State Bank of India-employer and quashed and set aside the judgment and award passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patna dtd. 20/3/2015 passed in Reference Case No. 02(C) of 2011, the original Patna High Court LPA No.764 of 2017 dt.8/10/2018 respondent No.2-workamn-employee has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) The facts leading to the present Letters Patent Appeal, in nutshell, are as under;

(3.) That the appellant, herein, (hereinafter referred to as the 'workman') was temporarily appointed as a Security Guard at Birpur Branch of State Bank of India on 14/3/1984. He joined the services as temporary Guard on 20/3/1984. That by the letter/order dtd. 14/9/1987 issued by the Bank, the workman was absorbed in permanent establishment provided that he has completed six months of probation period satisfactorily. That after the probation period, he was confirmed in the service vide order dtd. 14/3/1988. That the workman retired on 31/12/1997 on attaining the age of superannuation. He was paid all the retirement benefits at the time of his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation. That after period of almost 10 years from the date of retirement, he approached the High Court by way of C.W.J.C. No. 800 of 2007 making grievance with respect to non-payment of pensionary benefits. That the said writ petition came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dtd. 23/1/2009 by relegating the workman to approach the Industrial Tribunal. That thereafter the workman raised an industrial dispute on 15/4/2009. It was the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Patna raising the dispute that his date of confirmation is wrongly considered as 14/3/1988 and it ought to have been 20/11/1984. The Assistant Labour Commissioner(Central) -cum- Conciliation Officer referred the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal. The terms of reference read as under;