Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. - (1.) Heard Sri Adarsh Bhushan, for the petitioner and Sri Satish Chaturvedi, for State Bank of India.
(2.) The writ petition has been filed against the order of Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 21.01.2016, rejecting the application of the petitioner under Section 33-C(2) of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(3.) The petitioner was appointed as 'Godown Watchman' on a temporary post on 18.12.1970, in State Bank of India. His services were terminated on 05.05.1973. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute and the matter was referred to the Tribunal for adjudicating the dispute relating to termination of the service of the petitioner. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties, by award dated 10.05.1985 (published on 30.05.1985), held that termination of the service of the petitioner is not justified. The termination being void ab-initio, the petitioner was entitled to be reinstated in service with full back wages. This award was challenged in Writ C No. 14627 of 1985, which was dismissed by order dated 02.11.1995. Thereafter, Chief Manager issued an appointment letter to the petitioner on 22.04.1996, appointing him on the post of 'Watchman'. Chief Manager issued another letter dated 24.08.1996, stating that the petitioner was reinstated in service in pay-scale of Rs.1600-3020/- but reinstatement was not upon any vacant post. The petitioner moved an application dated 05.11.1996, claiming bonus and medical reimbursement w.e.f. 05.05.1973, which was rejected by Chief Manager by his letter dated 04.12.1996. Chief Manager issued another letter dated 03.07.1997, appointing the petitioner on the post of Watchman/Co-messenger/Co-cash coolly, for 6 months probation. Thereafter, he confirmed the petitioner by order dated 05.03.1998, w.e.f. 15.01.1998. The petitioner moved Civil Contempt Application before this Court, on the allegation that fresh appointment letter dated 03.07.1997, amounts to contempt as the Tribunal has directed for his reinstatement in service. The contempt application was disposed of by order dated 02.09.2001, with observation that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the Act to execute his award.;