ALL INDIA BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION THE STATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION PETITIONERS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA THE PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ALL INDIA STATE BANK STAFF FEDERATION Vs. NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL:NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL BANK DISPUTES :NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL BANK DISPUTES
LAWS(SC)-1961-8-14
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on August 28,1961

ALL INDIA BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,STATE BANK OF INDIA,ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (BANK DISPUTES) Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE CO LIMITED AUTOMOBILE PRODUCTS OF INDIA STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR MOHD SHARFUDDIN SALES TAX OFFICER BOMBAY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [LAWS(SC)-1964-2-22] [REFERRED]
EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1985-10-1] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA GENERAL INSURANCE OBC VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD [LAWS(MAD)-2013-2-83] [REFERRED TO]
H PUTTAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-1978-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
G BALAGOPALAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-2-89] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED VS. PETROLEUM EMPLOYEES UNION [LAWS(BOM)-2000-11-34] [REFERRED TO]
KAAMAREDDY SURYANARAYANA VS. DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE OFFICER CUM ELECTION OFFICER WEST GODAVARI CO OPERATIVE SUGARS LIMITED [LAWS(APH)-1975-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
EASTERN RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CONGRESS VS. GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY [LAWS(CAL)-1964-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
A C MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-1971-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
DUVVUR PAPIREDDI AND OTHERS VS. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO [LAWS(APH)-1971-6-30] [REFERRED TO]
MANGALMAY INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS SCHOOL VS. GGSIP UNIVERSITY [LAWS(DLH)-2017-6-9] [REFERRED TO]
TIRUPATI CYLINDERS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANR. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-9-168] [REFERRED TO]
SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2016-5-82] [REFERRED TO]
YOGESH BHATT VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS [LAWS(UTN)-2016-2-14] [REFERRED]
RADHEY SHYAM SHARMA VS. POST BLASTER GENERAL CENTRAL CIRCLE NAGPUR [LAWS(SC)-1964-3-53] [RELIED ON]
L N MTSHRA INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL CHANGE PATNA DR JAGADANAND JHA DR JAGADANAND JHA L N MISHRA INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL CHANGE PATNA L N MISHRA INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL CHAN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-1988-3-35] [RELIED ON]
REVENUE BAR ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-80] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJ GOPAL DENGA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-1979-6-4] [REFERRED TO]
I R COELHO VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-1991-7-31] [REFERRED TO]
DEVENDRAPPA M H VS. KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION [LAWS(KAR)-1987-11-7] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV DAYAL SINGH ETC. VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ANR. [LAWS(HPH)-1974-10-14] [REFERRED TO]
M A DAVID VS. KSEB [LAWS(KER)-1971-10-10] [REFERRED TO]
YED RAM VS. U P STATE PUBLIC SERVICE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-614] [REFERRED TO]
KESORAM RAYON WORKMENS UNION VS. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS [LAWS(CAL)-1966-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
NORTH EASTERN CHEMICALS VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2012-6-42] [REFERRED TO]
MUSTAFA HUSSAIN VS. UNION OF INDIA UOI [LAWS(APH)-1981-3-27] [REFERRED TO]
RAMRAO LAXMIKANT SHIRKHEDKAR VS. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1962-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA SCHEDULE CASTES SCHEDULED TRIBES AND BUDDHISTS L I C EMPLOYEESÏ¿½ WELFARE ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2010-7-451] [REFERRED TO]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1978-1-6] [FOLLOWED]
WORKMEN OF MEENAKSHI MILLS LIMITED RAJASTHAN TRADE UNION KENDRA RAJASTHAN TRADE UNION KENDRA WORKMEN OF BUCKINGHAM AND CARNATIC MILLS HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONST LIMITED WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL VS. MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD [LAWS(SC)-1992-5-29] [REFERRED TO]
SUPRIYO @ SUPRIYA CHAKRABORTY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2023-10-63] [REFERRED TO]
SALIL KUMAR SEAL VS. GENERAL MANAGER, FERROCHROME PLANT PROJECT [LAWS(ORI)-1973-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
SIDDAPPA MADIVALAPPA UGARKHOD VS. BASAVARAJ KALLAPA KUGATI [LAWS(KAR)-2019-12-181] [REFERRED TO]
MAHANT LACHMAN DASS CHELA MAHANT ISHAR DASS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1968-3-55] [REFERRED]
M/S RAJPUR HYDRO POWER LTD. VS. M/S PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-19] [REFERRED TO]
HINDU EDUCATIONAL TRUST VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANOTHER [LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-397] [REFERRED TO]
NANDKUMAR MAHADEO DENGANE VS. BHAVIKA VIDYA PRASARAK MANDAL [LAWS(BOM)-2008-4-97] [REFERRED TO]
C O D CHHEOKI EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-1995-3-120] [REFERRED TO]
LOHIA MACHINES LML KARAMCHARI SANGH VS. REGISTRAR TRAD UNIONS [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-182] [REFERRED TO]
BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET VS. CRICKET ASSOCIATION OF BIHAR & ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2016-7-41] [REFERRED TO]
JOSEPH KURUVILLA VELLUKUNNEL D CHACKO KAPPON VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA:REGISTRAR KERALA HIGH COURT [LAWS(SC)-1962-3-7] [REFERRED]
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY WORKERS FEDERATION VS. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(KER)-1982-11-23] [REFERRED TO]
Madras Medical Mission VS. State of Tamil Nadu [LAWS(MAD)-2003-9-75] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL VS. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MAHARASHTRA STATE, PUNE AND OTHERS [LAWS(BOM)-1991-2-97] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH CHANDRA PANT; ANAND SINGH MER VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS [LAWS(UTN)-2014-11-48] [REFERRED]
RAGHUBAR DAYAL JAI PARKASH CHITTARMAL RAMDAYAL NATHUMALL HARIKISHAN DASS DASWANDI RAM BANARSI DASS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1961-9-10] [REFERRED]
V V MINERAL REGISTERED FIRM VS. DIRECTOR OF GEOLOGY AND MINING GUINDY AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT [LAWS(MAD)-2007-6-340] [REFERRED TO]
Southern Railway Mazdoor Union VS. Railway Board [LAWS(MAD)-2003-10-207] [REFERRED TO]
KONKADI PADMANABHA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-2015-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
NALGONDA DISTRICT OIL MILLERS ASSOCIATION NALGONDA VS. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2002-3-57] [REFERRED TO]
KRANTH SANGRAM PARISHATH VS. N JANARDHAN REDDY [LAWS(APH)-1992-9-67] [REFERRED TO]
ANAND VARDHAN CHANDEL VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-1978-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
BHOLA NATH SEN VS. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER [LAWS(CAL)-1990-5-28] [REFERRED TO]
JANARDAN VASANT PATIL VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2016-9-23] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV MISHRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2019-2-315] [REFERRED TO]
HARAKH BHAGAT VS. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(PAT)-1967-7-5] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-12-360] [REFERRED TO]
SIDDHI BALA BOSE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1978-11-27] [REFERRED TO]
T.SRIRANGA RAO VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-2013-9-59] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR RASTOGI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-2-203] [REFERRED TO]
DANGETI GANAPATI RAO VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-1981-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA IDBI OFFICERS ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-9-173] [REFERRED TO]
MANUBHAI D SHAH PROF VS. LIC OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-1980-6-4] [REFERRED]
BULLION AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE EXCHANGE PVT LTD VS. FORWARD MARKETS COMMISSION BOMBAY [LAWS(ALL)-1979-1-53] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED VS. PETROLEUM EMPLOYEES UNION [LAWS(BOM)-2000-11-31] [REFERRED TO]
A P DAIRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. B NARASIMHA REDDY [LAWS(SC)-2011-9-64] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE RUNGTA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-7-234] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA [LAWS(P&H)-1992-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK STAFF UNION STATE BANK OF INDIA OFFICERSS VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-1989-4-3] [REFERRED TO]
IN RE DISRUPTION OF POWER SUPPLY IN PRAYAGRAJ VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2023-3-76] [REFERRED TO]
R.K. SHARMA VS. BHARAT LITHO [LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-480] [REFERRED TO]
MRF MAZDOOR SANG VS. COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR [LAWS(APH)-2013-10-102] [REFERRED TO]
T SRIRANGA RAO VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(APH)-2013-9-13] [REFERRED TO]
RASHTRIYA MILL MAZDOOR SANGH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1987-8-19] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI DAYALBAGH COOP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD VS. REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(DLH)-2012-12-29] [REFERRED TO]
BAPUJI EDUCATIONAL ASSOCN VS. STATE [LAWS(KAR)-1984-9-4] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN BANK VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [LAWS(MAD)-1963-1-19] [REFERRED TO]
PERIYAR SELF RESPECT PROPAGANDA INSTITUTION TRICHY VS. STATEOF T N [LAWS(MAD)-1987-4-19] [REFERRED TO]
DAULAT RAM COLLEGE SOCIETY VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-32] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE VS. GENERAL SECRETARY ASSOCIATION OF THE STATE BANK OF [LAWS(KER)-1978-1-26] [REFERRED TO]
V GOPINATHAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1963-3-25] [REFERRED TO]
M V S PRASADA RAO VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1984-10-24] [REFERRED TO]
VIDYA SAGAR INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HELTH AND NEURO SCIENCES VS. VIDYA SAGAR HOSPITAL EMPLIYEES UNION [LAWS(DLH)-2005-9-106] [REFERRED TO]
KASHINATH BALKRISHNA WAGHMARE VS. THE CANTONMENT BOARD, DEOLALI CAMP, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER [LAWS(BOM)-1984-7-47] [REFERRED TO]
JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD VS. NELLIMARIA JUTE MILLS CO LTD [LAWS(CAL)-1992-5-27] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA GENERAL INSURANCE EMPLOYEES CONGRESS VS. GENERAL INSURERS PUBLIC SECTOR ASSOCIATION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2005-2-53] [REFERRED TO]
THE PUNJAB CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. VS. THE WORKMEN OF THE PUNJAB CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-1968-4-16] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT NARAYAN MISHRA VS. STATE [LAWS(PAT)-1986-8-25] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Civil Appeal No. 154 of 1961 has been filed on special leave obtained from this Court against an order of K. T. Desai, J., functioning as the National Industrial Tribunal (Banks Disputes) Bombay dated October 31, 1960. The point arising for decision in the appeal is as regards the constitutional validity of S. 34A of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 which was enacted on August 26, 1960 as an amendment to the patent Act (Act X of 1949), The appellant before this Court is the All India Bank Employees Association which is a trade union organization of Bank Employees of several banks operating in India. The Punjab National Bank Employees' Union, which is a trade union with similar objects has been permitted to intervene in this appeal in support of the appellant union. The three other Writ Petitions are by other Bank Employees' Unions whose description would be apparent from the cause title and all these cases have been heard together because in the writ petitions also the point raised is identical, viz., the validity of S. 34A of the Banking Companies Act, which will be referred to hereafter as the impugned provision.
(2.)Section 34A whose validity is the matter in dispute in these proceedings runs in the following terms:-
"34A, (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sec. 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, or any other law for the time being in force, no banking company shall, in any proceeding under the said Act or in any appeal or other proceeding arising therefrom or connected therewith, be compelled by any authority before which such proceeding is pending to produce, or give inspection of, any of its books of account or other document or furnish or disclose any statement or information, when the banking company claims that such document, statement or information is of a confidential nature and that the production or inspection of such document or the furnishing or disclosure of such statement or information would involve disclosure of information relating to .

(a) any reserves not shown as such in its published balance sheet; or

(b) any particulars not shown therein in respect of provisions made for bad and doubtful debts and other usual or necessary provisions.

2. If, in any such proceeding in relation to any banking company other than the Reserve Bank of India, any question arises as to whether any amount out of the reserves or provisions referred to in sub-section (1) should be taken into account by the authority before which such proceeding is pending, the authority may, if it so thinks fit, refer the question to the Reserve Bank and the Reserve Bank shall after taking into account principles of sound banking and all relevant circumstances concerning the banking company, furnish to the authority a certificate stating that the authority shall not take into account any amount as such reserves and provisions of the banking company or may take them into account only to the extent of the amount specified by it in the certificate, and the certificate of the Reserve Bank on such question shall be final and shall not be called in question in any such proceeding.

(3) For the purposes of this section, "banking company" shall have the meaning assigned to it in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947".

(3.)Before commencing the examination of the points in controversy and the grounds on which the legality of the above provision is impugned, it would be helpful for a better appreciation of the problem if we set out, in very brief outline, the history of the steps which led to the enactment in dispute. There was a long standing practice in England of Banking Companies, as distinguished from companies carrying on other commercial etc. activities, not to disclose, in their balance sheets and Profit and Loss accounts, bad and doubtful debts and the provision made therefor, as well as the secret reserves created and held under various items-a practice which received judicial recognition by Buckley, L. J. in Newton v. Birmmgham Small Arms Co. Ltd., (1906) 2 Ch 378. This practice was followed by several banks in India and questions arose from time to time as to how far the practice was consistent with the statutory provisions as to disclosure contained in the several Companies Acts enacted from time to time. We shall, however, add that the desirability and even the legality of this practice has not gone without challenge, though there has been a considerable body of opinion which has held this to be salutary and necessary for the preservation and progress of a credit institution like a bank. We are not now concerned with the desirability or ethics of the practice which is a matter for the consideration of the legislature but as to the steps by which accord was established between the practice and the law


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.