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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1149

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. RAJA, V. SIVAGNANAM, JJ.
The General Secretary, Central Bank of India Staff Union - Appellant
Versus
The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office & Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 2134 of 2012
Decided On : 18-06-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. K.M. Ramesh.
For the Respondent: G. Anand for M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.

Headnote:

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 18(1) - Assailing impugned order - Extending arrears - First respondent bank entered into a settlement with appellant union for enhancement of wages to part-time employees - Subsequent to settlement, the Central Office as well as Regional Office of the first respondent issued their Circular incorporating the terms of settlement - By said settlement wages per week for part-time employees were fixed Subsequent to the above settlement another bipartite settlement was entered into between the appellant union and the first respondent Bank for enhancement of wages payable to the part-time employees, by which, the wages per week for part-time employees were fixed with effect - Held, It is also seen from the counter affidavit filed by the respondent bank before the CGIT that who was made as a regular part-time was given scale of wages from and thereby she was paid arrears of wages as per the settlement - she was paid wages as applicable to regular part-time and in fact, she has given a letter stating that she will not make any claim for arrears of wages in terms of settlement - Thus when a specific plea was taken by the first respondent bank in their counter affidavit that those casual part-time Safai Karmacharies were paid wages as applicable to regular part-time Safai Karmacharies only after their absorption in regular service it was not even denied by the appellant union - Therefore reasonings given by the learned Single Judge to reverse the award that (a) settlement has excluded casual workers and that (b) extending the arrears to those 14 workmen will amount to second benefit, are absolutely in order - Writ appeal stands dismissed

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 05.06.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.37814 of 2007, whereby the award passed by the second respondent/Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (in short “CGIT”) was reversed, holding that 14 part-time Safai Karmacharies were not eligible for the benefit of Settlement reached under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, on 28.11.1997.

2. Short facts leading to the filing of this writ appeal are stated below:-

The first respondent bank entered into a settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, on 28.11.1997, with the appellant union for enhancement of wages to part-time employees. Subsequent to the settlement, the Central Office as well as Regional Office of the first respondent issued their Circular Nos.CO:PRS:97-98-194, dated 10.12.1997, and RO:PRS:98-99-1273, dated 18.09.1998, respectively, incorporating the terms of settlement dated 28.11.1997. By the said settlement dated 28.11.1997, wages per week for part-time employees were fixed as stated below:-

(a) From 01.11.1992 to 31.10.1994:-

Upto 3 hours

Rs.130/- p.m.

More than 3 hours but less than 6 hours

Rs.375/- p.m.

(b) From 01.11.1994

Upto 3 hours

Rs.150/- p.m.

More than 3 hours but less than 6 hours

Rs.440/- p.m.

Subsequent to the above settlement dated 28.11.1997, another bipartite settlement dated 27.03.2000 was entered into between the appellant union and the first respondent Bank for enhancement of wages payable to the part-time employees, by which, the wages per week for part-time employees were fixed with effect from 01.11.1997 as stated below:-

(a) Upto 3 hours

Minimum of Rs.450/- p.m.

(b) More than 3 hours but less than 6 hours

Rs.740/- p.m.

However, the first respondent bank did not pay the aforesaid enhanced wages to the said 14 part-time Safai Karmachari employees as per the above said settlements and circulars.

3. Mr. K.M. Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellant union, would submit that although 14 part-time Safai Karmacharis have worked for long number of years, they have not been paid with arrears and on the request made by them, the first respondent bank has not given valid reason for rejecting their claim. When the appellant Union claimed on behalf of 14 part-time Safai Karmacharies that in the case one Mrs. Chinnamma/part-time employee, the respondent bank has paid enhanced wages till the date of her absorption as per the settlements and circulars and she has been paid arrears for the period from 01.11.1992 to 30.06.1998. Therefore, the respondent bank cannot adopt any hostile discrimination in respect of 14 part-time Safai Karmacharies, as it is nothing but a clear unfair labour practice and victimization. To this stand, the respondent bank replied that with regard to regular part-time Safai Karmacharies, they were given arrears of wages in terns of settlement dated 28.11.1997 and circulars issued therein by the bank, but, in respect of casual labourers, who were working in cleaning of the branches in the absence of regular Safai Karmacharies, they were given arrears of wages from the date they were regularized as they were not entitled to claim arrears for the period before their regularization as per the settlement dated 28.11.1997. Therefore, in view of the said reply, the appellant union raised an industrial dispute on 21.07.2000 for non-payment of enhanced wages to 14 part-time Safai Karmachari employees as per the settlements and thereupon, the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, referred the industrial dispute for adjudication to the second respondent/CGIT; and the issue that was referred for adjudication is:

    “Whether the claim of Central Bank of India Employees Union for payment of arrears with all attendant benefits to 14 Safai Karmacharies as per the IBA settle

    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 Back to top