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

1956 Supreme(Cal) 73

SARMA SARKAR, CHAKRABARTI
PANKAJ KUMAR GANGULY – Appellant
Versus
BANK OF INDIA – Respondent


CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THE only question involved in this appeal is whether Sinha, J. , was right, in quashing by a writ of certiorari an order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in which the order had been made and had wrongly decided that it had such jurisdiction. The appellants contended that in so quashing the Tribunal's order, the learned Judge had himself assumed a jurisdiction which he did not possess under Article 223 of the Constitution and that his decision on the question of the Tribunal's jurisdiction was also wrong on the merits.

( 2 ) THE appeal has arisen out of an industrial dispute between the Bank of India and 13 out of its 87 probationary temporary employees in its office at Calcutta. The facts of the dispute have been set out by the learned Judge in careful detail, but for the purposes of the present appeal it is necessary to late only a few of them. It appears that on and from the 24th December 1951, there was a strike In the Calcutta of lice of the Bank of "india, during which all the local employees, except only 24 of the 37 probationary or temporary ones, remained absent from duty




































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