MANAGER NOW REGIONAL DIRECTOR R B I Vs. GOPINATH SHARMA
LAWS(SC)-2006-7-8
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on July 17,2006

MANAGER (NOW REGIONAL DIRECTOR) R.B.I Appellant
VERSUS
GOPINATH SHARMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The appellant, The Manager (Now Regional Director), Reserve Bank of India, Mall Road, Kanpur, aggrieved against the final judgment and order dated 4.9.2003 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabd in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35290 of 1996, has filed this appeal. The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the first respondent herein and set aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court and ordered reinstatement on similar post with back wages.
(2.) BACKGROUND FACTS: Respondent No.1 was advised that he has been wait listed for daily wage casual employment in the Bank at Lucknow office of the Bank. Respondent No.1 applied for consideration of his day-to-day appointment which request was acceded to. In June, 1975, respondent No.1 acquired qualification of High School but did not inform the Bank about the same. Therefore, his name was included in the fresh list from 1.7.1975 to 30.6.1976 and was allowed to work during the aforesaid period. The name of respondent No.1 was not included in the fresh list from 1.7.1976 to 30.7.1977. He made representation for inclusion of his name in the fresh list from 1976-1977. However, his representation was turned down by the Bank. Respondent No.1 again started making representations for taking him back on the basis of the judgment of this Court in H.D. Singh vs. Reserve Bank of India, 1986 AIR(SC) 132 = 1986 AIR(SC) 132 and thereafter raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) Kanpur. The Central Government referred the matter for adjudication to the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal, Kanpur as under:- "Whether the action of management of RBI, Kanpur in striking off the name of Gopi Nath Sharma from the list of approved peon-cum-Farash is justified If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled -
(3.) On 30.7.1996, an award was passed by the Tribunal rejecting the claim of respondent No.1 on the ground of delay and laches and also on merits holding that since as per evidence adduced before Tribunal, he did not complete the service of 240 days in the Bank, he is not entitled to the benefit of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the I.D. Act") or the benefit of the judgment of this Court in H.D. Singh vs. Reserve Bank of India (supra).;


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