Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. The respondent is one of the Banks which were nationalised on July 19, 1969 by Central Act 5 of 1970. On August 18, 1973, the Board of Directors of the respondent Bank passed a resolution stating that the Federation of the Indian Bank Employees Union and the constituent Unions be granted recognition and further (a) 2 office-bearers of the Federation of the Indian Bank Employees Union be released from official work for Union work on all working days; (b) 2 office bearers of the Indian Bank Employees Union, Madras, on all working days for the Union work : and (c) one office-bearer each in the following six affiliate unions be released from 2 P.M. from Monday to Friday of each week viz., Indian Bank Employees Union, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala Mysore, Bombay, New Delhi and West Bengal States. This according to the petitioner, was known as 'duty relief. On July 29, 1973, it is alleged, the Management signed a settlement with the petitioner Federation and the affiliate Unions and both parties agreed to abide by the Code of discipline, one of the conditions in the Code of Discipline was that both the Management and the Labour will not resort to any unilateral action and disputes settled at the appropriate level and that they would settle all future differences, disputes and grievances by mutual negotiations, conciliation and voluntary arbitration. The respective office-bearers of the Federation and the Units enjoyed the duty relief, as above until it is said, on September 24, 1976, the Management issued a letter to withdraw the duty relief with effect from October 1, 1976. The petitioner Federation protested against the same and when they did not get any reply from the Management filed W. P. No. 4438 of 1976 for quashing the order of the Management dated September 24, 1976. However, according to the petitioner, during the tendency of the said writ petition, the Management came to a settlement with the Federation and agreed to restore the duty relief. On the basis of the said understanding, it is alleged, the petitioner withdrew the said writ petition on December 14, 1977 and wrote a letter to the Management on January 2, 1978 requesting it to grant duty relief to the respective office-bearers of the Federation. The Management granted the same, vide their letter dated January 12, 1978. Suddenly, however, by its notice dated November 2, 1982, purported to be under Section 9A of the Industrial disputes Act, the respondent proposed to withdraw the duty relief with effect from December 1, 1982. The Federation and the Units, it is said in the petition, naturally got agitated' and issued a strike notice on November 21, 1982 proposing to go on strike from December 8, 1982 On November 30, 1982, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), the conciliation officer, issued notice to both parties, that is, the federation and the Management. Efforts of conciliation, however, failed and the Regional Labour commissioner submitted his failure report on March 28, 1983. The Government, vide its letter dated June 21, 1983, informed the petitioner as well as the respondent that the conciliation report had been received by it on May 31, 1983. According to the petitioner, although the Government was obliged to make a reference to the dispute for adjudication to the Labour Tribunal, but the Government decided not to refer the dispute for adjudication. Following the same, the Management has issued an order on August 21, 1984 and withdrew the duty relief. Hence, the instant petition.