* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of order: 30^th May, 2024 + W.P.(C) 12738/2018 ICICI BANK LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Senior Advocate, Mr. Anand Shankar Jha, Ms. Meenakshi S. Devgan, Mr. Sachin Mintri, Mr. Abhilekh Tiwari and Mr. Parvez Rahman, Advocate.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

ORDER

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of the impugned award dated 25^th June, 2018 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, CGIT –

cum – Labour Court No. 1, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in ID No. 13/2014.

2. The relevant facts which led to the filing of the instant petition are as follows:

a. The petitioner i.e., ICICI Bank Ltd. (“petitioner Bank”

hereinafter) vide letter dated 13^th August, 2010 offered a job Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 12738/2018 Page 1 of 23 to the respondent no. 2 (“respondent workman” hereinafter) which was duly accepted by him and accordingly, he joined his duties.

b. It is stated that the respondent workman from September, 2012 onwards allegedly absented himself from work without seeking prior permission of the petitioner Bank. Furthermore, the respondent workman was sanctioned leave by the petitioner from 16^th November, 2012 to 23^rd November, 2012 however the respondent workman failed to appear for the job thereafter.

c. The Human Resources Management Group of the petitioner Bank Vide letter dated 6^th December, 2012 advised the respondent workman to resume duty immediately in light of his unauthorised absence and furnish reasons for the absence.

d. Thereafter, the petitioner vide letter dated 19^th December, 2012, terminated the employment of respondent workman with immediate effect due to abandonment of service on his own account.

e. The respondent no. 2 then filed a representation against his termination by the petitioner before the Assistant Labour Commission (Central). Pursuant to the said representation, a notice was issued to the petitioner seeking its response. The Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 12738/2018 Page 2 of 23 petitioner filed its response before the Assistant Labour Commission (Central) on 25^th September, 2013.

f. In the year 2013, a certificate was issued by the Conciliation Officer under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter “the Act”) stating failure of conciliation proceedings. Thereafter, the respondent no. 2 raised an industrial dispute bearing ID No. 13/2014 seeking reinstatement and recovery of dues.

g. Subsequently, vide award dated 25^th June, 2018, the learned Labour Court partly allowed I.D. No. 13/2014 and held that the termination of respondent no. 2 was illegal and unjustified. Accordingly, the respondent no. 2 was directed to be reinstated and the prayer for back wages was rejected.

h. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking quashing of the impugned award.

3. Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the terms and conditions of employment as contained in the letter of appointment clearly mention that breach of the rules and regulations of the petitioner bank shall render the services of the respondent no. 2 to be terminated.

4. It is submitted that the respondent no. 2 was performing duties of an administrative and supervisory nature and is thus not a “workman” under Section 2(s) of the Act. The respondent no. 2 has also admitted in his cross Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 12738/2018 Page 3 of 23 examination that he was working in an administrative and policy making capacity.

5. It is submitted that from September, 2012 onwards, the respondent no. 2 started unauthorisedly absenting himself from his services without seeking prior permission of the petitioner bank.

6. It is submitted that the respo