SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(SC) 33

G.K.MITTER, K.S.HEGDE
P. D. Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Bank Of India – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K.SEN GUPTA, ANAND, H.L.Anand, NIREN DEY, S.V.Gupta

Judgement

HEGDE, J.:- In the aforementioned appeal by special leave, the point for consideration is whether the Labour Court Lucknow, was right in its conclusion that it was not competent to deal with Misc. Case No. 22/63 on its file, an application under Section 33 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947.

2. In 196l, the appellant was a clerk working in the Dehradun branch of the State Bank of India, the respondent herein. In connection with certain alleged misconduct the respondent held a departmental enquiry against him; came to the conclusion that he was guilty of the charge levelled against him and for the said offence it proposed to dismiss him from its service. But as at that time an industrial dispute between the respondent and its workmen was pending before the National Industrial Tribunal in Ref. No. 1 of 1960 (which will hereinafter be referred to as the industrial dispute), and the appellant being one of the office bearers of a recognised trade union contracted with the respondent and consequently a protected workman , it applied on April 27, 1962 under Section 33 (3) to the National Industrial Tribunal for permission to discharge him from Service. On the authority of an





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top