Madras High Court
P. Kalaimani vs The Deputy General Manager on 22 December, 2023
Author: S. Vaidyanathan
Bench: S. Vaidyanathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.12.2023
CORAM
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
W.A. No. 1693 of 2022
&
C.M.P. Nos. 11753, 11756 & 11759 of 2023
P. Kalaimani ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Deputy General Manager,
Canara Bank,
Circle Office, East Veli Street,
Madurai – 625 001.
2. The Presiding Officer,
Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal
Cum Labour Court,
26, Haddows Road,
1st Floor, “B” Wing, Shastri Bhavan,
Chennai – 6. ..Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Prayer: Writ Appeal as against the order dated 12.01.2022 made in
W.P. No. 1792 of 2004.
For Appellant :: Mr.K.V. Ananthakrishnan
For Respondents :: Mr.Goutham S. Raman
for R1 Mr.R.K.
Gandhi, Central Govt. Standing
Counsel for R2
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by S. Vaidyanathan,J.)
The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 12.01.2022 passed
in W.P. No.1792 of 2004.
2. The appellant/workman, who was working as a Peon under the
1st respondent Bank was placed under suspension for certain serious
irregularities and charge memo dated 07.05.1996 was issued to him. Based
on the findings of the Enquiry Officer in the domestic enquiry conducted,
the Disciplinary authority proposed the punishment of compulsory
retirement and the workman was asked to attend personal hearing. After the
personal hearing, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of
compulsory retirement by order dated 30.08.1997, which was taken up on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
appeal by the workman. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal on
04.03.1999 confirming the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority.
Thereafter, on failure of conciliation, the industrial dispute raised by the
workman was referred to the 2nd respondent Tribunal, which was taken up as
I.D. No. 44 of 2002. The workman filed a claim petition before the Tribunal
challenging the order of compulsory retirement. The Tribunal, by award
dated 15.09.2003, set aside the punishment imposed and granted
reinstatement with 50% backwages. Challenging the same, the Bank filed
W.P. No. 1792 of 2004 and by the order under challenge, the award passed
by the Tribunal was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the
Tribunal to proceed on merits and in accordance with law, after due notice
to the parties. Challenging the same, the workman is before this Court in
this intra court appeal.
3. Heard both sides.
4. The matter was heard at length and this Court suggested the
parties to arrive at a compromise. The 1st respondent Bank proposed
settlement by communication dated 12.12.2023.
5. Mr. K.V. Ananthakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
appellant submitted that as the appellant succeeded before the Tribunal and
the finding of the learned Single Judge is erroneous, though the workman is
willing to give up backwages, the workman may be extended the entire
arrears of pension and the benefit of full pension.
6. When this Court posed a question to Mr.Goutham S.
Raman, learned counsel appearing for the Bank, he submitted that the Bank
has reconsidered the request of the employee and agreed to extend full
pension vide communication dated 18.12.2023, however, stated that the
employee would not be entitled to arrears of pension till September, 2023
and that other amounts payable to the employee as per the list annexed
therein, after adjusting the deductions, would be paid.
7. When the matter came up yesterday, learned counsel for the
workman took time to consult his client and ultimately, when the matter is
taken up today, he would submit that clause 2 of the communication dated
12.12.2023 may be deleted and that the employee is willing to accept other
proposals given by the Bank and that a time limit may be fixed for the Bank
to release the amount.
8. Taking note of the submissions of both parties, the writ appeal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
stands disposed of with the following directions:
(i) All the amounts due to the employee, as per the communication/offer
dated 12.12.2023 shall be extended to the employee within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(ii) The arrears of pension commencing from September, 2023 shall be
paid on regular date as applicable to other employees.
(iii) Clause 2 of the communication dated 12.12.2023 is deleted as the
officials, who attended the hearing today through online agreed to delete the
said clause and extend all other benefits to the employee.
(iv) The amount lying in deposit together with accrued interest, as could
be seen from column No.6 of the table in the communication dated
12.12.2023 shall be released to the employee on production of a copy of this
order. The counsel for the Bank/the officer concerned is expected to assist
the employee to receive the amount, which is lying in deposit.
No costs. Connected C.M.Ps are closed.
(S.V.N.J.) (K.R.S.J.)
nv 22.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1. The Deputy General Manager,
Canara Bank,
Circle Office, East Veli Street,
Madurai – 625 001.
2. The Presiding Officer,
Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal
Cum Labour Court,
26, Haddows Road,
1st Floor, “B” Wing, Shastri Bhavan,
Chennai – 6.
S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.
AND
K. RAJASEKAR ,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
nv
22.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
