ARUN MISHRA, AMITAVA ROY
Bank of Baroda – Appellant
Versus
G. Palani – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. I.A. Nos. 3, 4 & 5 of 2012 for intervention are permitted to be withdrawn, with liberty to avail appropriate remedy. Applications stand dismissed as withdrawn.
3. Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.
4. In these civil appeals, question arises with respect to the calculation of the pension on the basis of the definition of average emoluments given in Regulation 2(d) read with definition of the pay, as defined in Regulation 2(s) of the Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “the Regulations of 1995), of the concerned Banks.
5. The dispute is with respect to the employees who retired or died while in service on or after 1.4.1998 and before 31.10.2002. The Banks are governed by the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1970”). The regulations have been framed in exercise of powers conferred under Section 19 of the Act of 1970.
6. We are concerned in the instant cases with the officer’s class of the Banks. The provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are admittedly not applicable to them.
7. On 29.9.1995, the Board of D
Grid Corporation of Orissa and Others vs. Rasananda Das
All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others
U.P. Raghavendra Acharya and Others vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Chairman, Railway Board and Others vs. C.R. Rangadhamaiah and Others
Roshan Lal Tandon vs. Union of India
B.S. Yadav vs. State of Haryana
State of Gujarat vs. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni and Others
Deokinandan Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Others
D.S. Nakara and Others vs. Union of India
Indian Ex-services League and Others vs. Union of India and Others, (1991) 2 SCC 104 [Para 24
D.S. Nakara vs. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 [Para 25
Secretary (Estt.) Railway Board and Another vs. D. Francis Paul and Others
N.S. Giri vs. Corporation of City of Mangalore and Others
P. Sadagopan vs. Food Corporation of India
Dr. Rajinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Others
K. Kuppusamy and Another vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited and Another vs. Brojo Nath Ganguly and Another
Delhi Transport Corporation vs. D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress
Manojbhai N. Shah and Others vs. Union of India and Others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.