Back
2009 Supreme(Mad) 3013
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. JYOTHIMANI
All Bank Appraisers Federation, Tamil Nadu rep. By its General Secretary
Versus
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Others
Writ Petition Nos.7199 to 7204, 8813 & 10856 of 2004, 10857 & 17858 of 2004 & 8168 and 8169 of 2004.
Decided on: 07-08-2009
For the Petitioner:M. Muthupandia, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, V. Ravi, R2, S. Jayaraman, S. Sethuraman, P.R. Raman, T.M. Hariharan, C. Karthick, Advocates, M/s.T.S. Gopalan & Co., Gowtham Narayanan, K.S.V. Prasad, K. Vijayan, M/s. King & Partridge, S. Venkataraman, M/s. Aiyar & Dolia, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that claims under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, must not be frivolous and should merit reference for adjudication under section 12(5) of the Act. The court emphasized the distinction between the terms and conditions of service of Jewel Appraisers in different banks and the stand of the banks regarding the employment status of the appraisers.
Headnote:
Jewel Appraisers - Regularisation of Services - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 2(s), Section 12(5) - The court discussed the regularisation of services of Jewel Appraisers in various banks and the applicability of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The judgment highlighted the distinction between the terms and conditions of service of Jewel Appraisers in Indian Bank and Indian Overseas Bank, as well as the stand of various banks regarding the employment status of the appraisers. The court concluded that the claims of the Federation were frivolous and not meriting reference for adjudication under section 12(5) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the claim of the All Bank Appraisers Federation, Tamil Nadu, for the regularisation of the services of Jewel Appraisers in various banks. The Federation contended that the appraisers were working under the control of the banks, and their work was indispensable in the loan transactions of the banks. The Federation also cited previous awards and court decisions in support of their claim.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claims of the Federation were frivolous and not meriting reference for adjudication under section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court dismissed some writ petitions, closed others with liberty to pursue remedies after the disposal of related cases, and directed the Government to pass orders in accordance with section 12(5) of the Act in two cases.
Issues: The main issue was the regularisation of the services of Jewel Appraisers in various banks, and whether the claims of the Federation merited reference for adjudication under section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the claims of the Federation were frivolous and not meriting reference for adjudication under section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, based on the stand of the banks and the distinction between the terms and conditions of service of Jewel Appraisers in Indian Bank and Indian Overseas Bank.
Final Decision: The court dismissed some writ petitions, closed others with liberty to pursue remedies after the disposal of related cases, and directed the Government to pass orders in accordance with section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in two cases.
In all the above writ petitions, the issue involved is in respect of the claim of All Bank Appraisers Federation, Tamil Nadu for regularisation of the services of Jewel Appraisers in various banks.
2. The first batch of eight cases in W.P.Nos.7199 to 7204 of 2004, 8813 & 10856 of 2004 is filed by the Jewel Appraisers in Punjab National Bank, Corporation Bank, Canara Bank, Central Bank of India, Union Bank of India, UCO Bank, Syndicate Bank and Bank of Baroda, challenging the orders of the Union of India, Ministry of Labour, wherein the Government after considering the conciliation failure report of the respective Labour Officers, passed uniform orders, as follows:
"A similar dispute on the claims of Jewel Appraisers has been pending before the Honble High Court of Madras in Writ Appeal No.465 of 2001 filed by the management of Indian Overseas Bank. It is,therefore, considered not appropriate to refer the present dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication as the matter is subjudice before the High Court."
3. The second batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.10857 and 17858 of 2004 is also filed by the same Federation relating to the claim of regularisation by the jewel appraisers of Indian Bank. In those cases, the Government of India, after considering the conciliation failure report, passed the following order:
“The claims of Jewel Appraisers has been pending before the Honble High Court of Madras in a Writ Petition No.32994 of 2002 filed by the Indian Bank Employees Union arising out of the Award dated 8. 2002 passed by CGIT-cum-LC, Chennai in ID No.556/2001. It is, therefore, considered not appropriate to refer the present dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication as the matter is subjudice before the High Court."
4. The third batch of cases in W.P.Nos.8168 and8169 of 2004 is filed by the Jewel Appraisers of Indian Bank and Bank of Baroda respectively and in those cases, even after the conciliation failure report was sent by the concerned Conciliation Officer on 211. 2002 and 30.1.2003 respectively, the Government of India, has not passed any orders and therefore the prayer in these cases are for a direction against the Government of India to pass orders.
5. The case of the petitioner Union in these cases is that the respective banks are advancing jewel loans, which according to the petitioners, is the major portion of the total loan amounts advanced by the second respondent banks running to several crores of rupees. It requires the jewel appraising work and the Jewel Appraisers are employed by the respective banks on piece-rate basis and are paid wages at the rate of Rs.3, 000/- per month.
(a). According to the petitioners, the appraisers are to report to the bank every day and they have to be present throughout the day during banking hours and therefore, the Jewel Appraisers are working under the control of the banks concerned and it is their duty to find out that the jewels which are pledged are of pure quality.
(b). It is their case that in addition to that, they fill up jewel loan applications and obtain signatures from the customers. It is also stated that the bank collects Rs.1,000/-towards security deposit from each appraiser and therefore, according to them, their work is permanent throughout the year and it is indispensable in the loan transaction of the banks. Even though they are permanent, they are not given other benefits given to permanent workers of the banks.
(c). The petitioner Federation also informed the concerned banks about the award passed in I.D.No.25 of 1977 by the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai in respect of Jewel Appraisers employed in Indian Bank, directing their regularisation and that the award was confirmed by the High Court in the order dated 12. 1986 in W.P.No.1947 of 1980 and again confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.330 of 1986 and finally approved by the Honble Supreme Court in SLP No.10054 of 1990.
(d). It was, in those circumstances, the Federation had raised an industrial di
