Dismissed

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, v. The Central Govt.Industrial Tribal-Cum-Labour Court

Telangana HC10 Feb 2014WA/1672/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissing a writ appeal, the High Court upheld the learned Single Judge's order validating the Tribunal's direction for an employee to be considered for absorption by the Central Bank of India under the relevant Government Circular.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs.

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Vs The… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH &

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶3

W.A. No. 1672 of 2013

¶4

DATE: 10.02.2014

¶5

Between:

¶6

1. The Regional Manager 2. The Branch Manager .. Appellants

¶7

And

¶8

1. The Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal

¶9

-cum-Labour Court

¶10

2. Govt. of India

¶11

3. Md.Afzal Nawab .. Respondents

¶12

JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Chandraiah)

¶13

This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 31.07.2013 in W.P.No. 23035 of 2013 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition and upholding the order of the Tribunal which directed the appellants to consider the case of the 3^rd respondent - employee for absorption in view of the Circular dated 06.08.1990 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that the 3^rd respondent, who claimed to have worked in the appellant – Central Bank of India as temporary employee, raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No. 210 of 2002 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hyderabad on the ground that he was not absorbed as employee of the Bank in terms of the Circular dated 24.12.1990 issued by the Central Government. The 1^st respondent – Tribunal, while partly allowing the I.D., though observed that the 3^rd respondent approached the Labour Court at a belated stage, however directed the appellants to consider his case for absorption in view of

¶15

the Circular dated 06.08.1990 and if it is not possible he shall be considered for temporary or casual appointment taking his age as 03.01.1983. Being aggrieved by the same, the Central Bank of India filed W.P.No. 23035 of 2005, and this Court, while upholding the finding of the Tribunal, dismissed the writ petition. Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, the present Writ Appeal is filed.

¶16

The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the case of the 3^rd respondent does not fall within the parameters of the Circular dated 06.08.1990, therefore, he is not entitled to absorption.

¶17

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent submits that the Labour Court after considering various aspects of the matter in the light of the Circular dated 06.08.1990 directed the appellants to consider the case of the 3^rd respondent for absorption as temporary employee on par with several other designated persons, and the same has been confirmed by the learned single Judge in the writ petition, as such, the impugned order cannot be interfered with.

¶18

Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge, after elaborate consideration of the matter, rightly confirmed the view taken by the Tribunal that the case of the 3^rd

¶19

respondent falls within the ambit of Circular dated 06.08.1990, and it is left open for the appellants to test the applicability or non-applicability of the Circular for considering the

¶20

3^rd respondent’s case for absorption.

¶21

Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs.

¶22

As a sequel to the dismissal of the Writ Appeal, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶23

_________________

¶24

G. CHANDRAIAH, J 10.02.2014

¶25

______________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM,J

¶26

bcj

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, v. The Central Govt.Industrial Tribal-Cum-Labour Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, v. The Central Govt.Industrial Tribal-Cum-Labour Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hcl Technologies Limited Vs The Appellate Authority appointed under sec.53(1)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Hyd. Vs State Bank of Hyderabad.

Commissioner of Income Tax.Hyderabad Vs Srinivasa Hatcheries (P) Ltd.Hyd.

Dr.S.Pratap Vs Sri Krishnadevaraya Universiy

G. Shankar Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation Limited

The Senior Divisional Manager (Disciplinary Authority) Vs V.S. Malla Reddy