JUDGMENT (Per Swatanter Kumar, C.J.):

13 petitioners in this petition claim that they joined Standard Chartered Bank, respondent No.2, at various points of time and served for number of years. They were appointed in the capacity of Clerks and Typists. They are workmen within the meaning of Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as “the Act”. The Petitioners had various claims against the management of respondent No.2 and their claims were turned down. The allegation of the petitioners is that respondent No.2 had been intimidating its employees to resign failing which it was threatened that they would not be paid their lawful dues. Under this threat held out by respondent No.2, they were made to sign letters that bartered away the rights vested in them under the law. In order to fight for the legal rights, the petitioners submitted an application before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), under the provisions of the Act for conciliation. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.1 took cognizance and came to realise that there exists an industrial dispute between the parties. Notice on the demand of the petitioners was issued to respondent No.2 on 27th October, 2003. The respondents represented their case before the concerned authorities. According to the petitioners, their services had been terminated wrongfully and they showed the said authorities that they had not voluntarily resigned, as claimed by respondent No.2. The matter remained pending before respondent No.1. Vide an order dated 6th January, 2004, the petitioners were informed that no dispute existed between the parties as they had resigned voluntarily of their own accord and as such no reference could be made. This finding recorded by respondent No.1 was contrary to its earlier view which had been taken on 27th October, 2003, when after looking into the matter the authorities had issued notice to respondent No.2 patently demonstrating that the dispute existed between the parties.

2. The order dated 6th January, 2004, by which the reference of industrial dispute on the basis of letter of demand dated 29th September, 2003 was denied to the petitioners primarily on the ground that they had resigned from the services and had accepted full and final settlement of dues from respondent No.2. The said order reads as under:“ Government of India Ministry of Labour, Office of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Shramraksha Bhavan, Opp.RCF Building, Shiv Srushti Road, Sion, Mumbai400 022. No. B.ALC(C)III/ 7(99)/2003 Dated: January 6, 2004. To Shri Jeroo J. Dastur, 92B, 1st floor, Bhiwandi House, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai400 036. Sub: Industrial dispute raised by S/Shri Jeroo Dastur and 10 other workmen against the management of Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai, over alleged illegal termination of their services. Dear Sir (s), Please refer to your demand letter dated 29.9.2003 submitted in this office on the above subject. After going through the records and submissions, it is evident that S/Shri Jeroo Dastur and 10 other workmen have resigned from the services and accepted the full and final settlement dues from the Standard Chartered Bank. Therefore, the instant dispute is treated as disposed off in this office. Yours faithfully, Sd/( A.L. Kamble) Conciliation Officer and Assistant Labour Commissioner, (Central)III, Mumbai.”

3. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that they had submitted a demand to the Regional Labour Commissioner, with a copy to respondent No.2 which was duly received by them, wherein they had raised various controversies including the fact that the letters were got signed from the petitioners as a result of undue influence and coercion etc. and that they were entitled to reinstatement with full back wages as per the rights vested in them according to law. It was a detailed demand notice and in the light of that, the Appr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document