Orissa High Court
Aska Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd vs State Of Odisha on 27 May, 2025
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ODISHA AT CUTTACK
O.J.C. No.16617 of 2001
(An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India)
****
Aska Co-operative Central Bank Ltd.,
represented through its Secretary, At/PO: Aska,
Dist: Ganjam .... Petitioner
-versus-
1. State of Odisha, represented through Secretary
Labour and Employment, Secretariat Building,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda
2. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal
Office, Odisha, Bhubaneswar
3. The General Secretary, Cadre Sampadak
Sangha, Aska Cooperative Central Bank Ltd.,
At/PO: Aska, Ganjam.
4. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda
.... Opp. Parties
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Mr. Sourya Sundar Das, Senior Advocate
Assisted by Ms. Baijayanti Mohanty,
Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sahoo,
Additional Standing Counsel
(For Opposite Party Nos.1, 2 & 4)
Mr. Shaktidutta Tripathy, Advocate
(For Opposite Party No.3)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Hearing: 08.04.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 27.05.2025
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1 of 24
JUDGMENT
S.K. Mishra, J
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Award dated 6th October, 2001 (Annexure-4) passed by
learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Odisha, and
Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Case No.80 of 1994 is under
challenge in this writ petition, wherein all issues, except Issue No. IV,
have been dealt with and answered on merit in favour of the Opposite
Party No.3-Union.
3. Parties are described as per their status before Industrial
Tribunal for the sake of convenience in discussion.
4. The admitted facts on record, which led to filing of the writ
petition, are that there was a dispute between the Second Party-Union
and the Aska Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., the First Party-
Management, which is a registered Co-operative Society and engaged
a number of persons, including Cadre Secretaries to manage the
societies in their day-to-day business. The Cadre Secretaries have
formed a registered trade union, i.e., Cadre Sampadak Sangha, to
safeguard their interest. They claimed travelling allowance (T.A) at par
with Junior Assistant of the Bank asserting that since they are
discharging same and similar nature of duties as that of a Junior
Assistant, they should get Rs.35/- per day as T.A., which is availed by
a Junior Assistant instead of only Rs.8/- per day. Further, they claimed
an additional remuneration of Rs.200/- on the ground of being kept in
charge of two Service Co-operative Societies simultaneously. They
also claimed for regularization of the services of the Cadre Secretaries
working on ad-hoc basis so also bonus for the accounting year 1987-
88 onwards from Management. Moreover, they claimed for revision of
pay scale of the Cadre Secretaries at par with the Junior Assistant of
the Bank.
5. On failure of conciliation on the said demand of the Union,
the Government of Odisha in the Labour and Employment
Department, vide order dated 27.08.1994, in exercise of power
conferred under sub-section (5) of section 12 read with clause (d) of
sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for
brevity 'I.D. Act') referred the following disputes to learned Presiding
Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar for adjudication.
1. Whether Travelling Allowance paid to the Cadre Secretaries
working under the Aska Co-Operative Central Park Ltd.,
Aska District Ganjam whenever they go on tour to places
outside their jurisdiction needs any upward revision? If so,
what would be the quantum?
2. Whether the Cadre Secretaries working under the Aska Co-
operative Central Bank Ltd. Aska, Dist-Ganjam who remain
in charges of. two service Co-operative Societies
simultaneously are entitled for any extra remuneration? If so,
what should be the quantum?
3. Whether the services of the Cadre secretaries working on
adhoc basis under the Aska Co-operative Central Bank Ltd.
Aska Dist-Ganjam needs regularisation? If so, what should be
the details?
4. Whether the Cadre Secretaries under the Management of the
Aska Co-operative central Bank Ltd. Aska are entitled for
Bonus for the accounting years 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-
89 from their Management?
5. Whether the present wage scale of the Cadre secretaries of
Aska Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. Aska needs to be revised
at par with the scale of pay of the Junior Assistant of the
Bank? If so, what should be the details?
The matter so referred was registered as I.D. Case No.80 of
1994.
6. To substantiate and justify its demands, the Second Party-
Union filed its Statement of Claim. The Second Party-Union basically
pleaded in its Claim Statement that the First Party-Management is a
registered Co-operative Society under the Odisha Co-operative
Societies Act, 1962, shortly hereinafter, 'OCS Act'. To run its business
and for the smooth functioning of the bank, the First Party-
Management has engaged number of personnel, including the Cadre
Secretaries for the purpose. The Cadre Secretaries have been posted at
different Co-operative Societies to protect the interest of the bank as
well as to help the societies in their day-to-day business. To safeguard
their interest, the Cadre Secretaries have formed a union namely,
Cadre Sampadak Sangha, which is a Registered Union under the
Indian Trade Union Act. The Cadre Secretaries are also known as the
Secretary of the recognized viable Primary Agricultural Co-operative
Society (PACS), Managing Director of the Lamp Scale Agricultural
Multi-Purpose Co-operative Society (LAMPCS) and Farmers Service
Co-operative Society (FSS) and also Branch Manager of LAMPCS
and FSS. So far as their nature of work, it has been stated that the
Cadre Secretaries are required to bring money from the Co-operative
Central Bank and sanction the same to the needy persons and
thereafter, collect and deposit the same with the bank besides
distributing essential commodities, which are given by the
Government. It is the case of the Second Party-Union that even though
the Cadre Secretaries are appointed by the bank to safeguard its
interest and to act on behalf of the Bank, yet in each sphere of their
service career, there exists blatant discrimination between the Cadre
Secretaries and other employees of the bank. It is the specific stand of
the Second Party-Union that the Cadre Secretaries are doing the same
or similar type of jobs as that of a Junior Assistants of the bank and in
number of circumstances, they even shoulder higher responsibility
than the Junior Assistants. In spite of the same, there is a great
discrimination in between the Junior Assistants of the bank and the
Cadre Secretaries in the matter of their entitlements. Accordingly, a
demand was made to enhance the T.A. of Cadre Secretaries at par with
the T.A. paid to the Junior Assistant of the bank whenever they move
on tour outside their headquarters, to pay additional/extra remuneration
of Rs.200/- to the Cadre Secretaries, who are sometimes ordered to
remain in charge of more than one Service Cooperative Society, to
regularise the services of the Cadre Secretaries, who were working on
ad-hoc basis for years together with a meagre salary of Rs.600/- per
month, to pay them bonus, as is being paid to the bank employees,
from the accounting year 1987-88 onwards, to revise their scale of pay
at par with Junior Assistants of the bank. A stand was also taken in the
Claim Statement that Balasore, Sambalpur and Khurda Central Co-
operative Banks have already regularised the services of their Cadre
Secretaries and have extended all the service benefits to them at par
with Bank employees.
7. Being noticed, the Management submitted its Written
Statement contending therein that Cadre Secretaries are not employees
of the Bank. They are completely regulated under a different set of
Rules. It is the stand of the Management that, the provision as to
Travelling Allowance has been deleted from the Cadre Rules vide
order dated 18.04.1988. It is also the stand of the Management that, the
Cadre Secretaries are assigned with dual responsibilities, keeping in
view the outstanding loan of PACS only, which is not a regular
feature. Further, it is the stand of the Management that, services of the
Ad-hoc Cadre Secretaries have already been regularized w.e.f.
01.11.1994 in compliance with the order of the Registrar, Co-operative
Societies, Odisha vide Order No.20299 dated 08.11.1994, and they are
getting equivalent facilities at par with the regular Cadre Secretaries.
Moreover, it is the stand of the Management that Junior Assistants of
the Bank and Cadre Secretaries working in Primary Agriculture Co-
operative Societies (PACS) are two different cadres. The Cadre
Secretaries are already getting bonus from the Cadre Committee of the
Bank out of the society fund since last two years despite any provision
for the same in the Cadre Rules. Even though the Cadre Secretaries are
not entitled to any financial benefits like bonus etc, as they don't come
under the Bank Cadre, an amount of Rs.1.50 crore has already been
paid to the Cadre Secretaries out of the general fund of the Bank in
order to avoid discontentment amongst the employees.
8. Based on the pleadings and evidence on record, learned
Industrial Tribunal, vide the impugned award dated 6th October, 2001
passed in I.D. Case No.80 of 1994, answered Issue No. I holding that
the Cadre Secretaries are entitled to draw T.A/D.A @ Rs.35/- per day,
which the Junior Assistants of the bank are drawing.
8.1 While answering Issue No.II as to whether the Cadre
Secretaries working under Aska Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., who
remain in charge of two Service Co-operative Societies
simultaneously, are entitled for any extra remuneration, the learned
Industrial Tribunal directed the Management to pay an extra amount of
Rs.150/-per month to the Cadre Secretaries, who are in dual charge of
two societies.
8.2 While answering Issue No. III as to the regularization of
service of the Cadre Secretaries working on ad-hoc basis, based on the
admission of the Management in its Written Statement, the Industrial
Tribunal ordered for regularization of the remaining three Ad-hoc
Cadre Secretaries, out of 22 Ad-hoc Cadre Secretaries, within a period
of one month from the date of publication of the Award.
8.3 So far as Issue No.IV as to the claim of bonus for the
accounting years 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89, the Industrial
Tribunal did not allow the same, as the Management is already paying
bonus @ 8.33% equivalent to that of Junior Assistants and other
employees and during argument the disputant Union did not press the
said demand.
8.4 So far as issue No.V as to the revision of scale of pay of
Cadre Secretaries, the Industrial Tribunal ordered that the Cadre
Secretaries are entitled to the scale of pay of the Junior Assistants of
the Bank along with the usual D.A.
9. Being aggrieved by such Award, the present writ petition
has been preferred by the Management basically on the ground that,
since the Registrar, Co-operative Societies (RCS), whose sanction as
well as approval is necessary in case of any deviation in the provisions
made in the Cadre Rules, has neither been arrayed as a party to the said
dispute nor has he been given any direction in that regard, the
proceeding is bad for non-joinder of proper party and the direction in
the award is not executable. Further, as the Cadre Secretaries'
appointment, pay fixation, disciplinary action, transfer and other
service conditions are governed as per the Cadre Rules formulated by
the RCS, the adjudication of the matter, in the absence of such an
important party, is illegal so also the Award is liable to be set aside.
9.1 That apart, a ground has also been urged by the
Management that, there is absolutely no oral or documentary evidence
available on the record to establish that the duties and responsibilities
of Cadre Secretaries as well as the Junior Assistants are same or
similar. Thus, the award needs to be interfered with and reversed.
10. Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel for the First Party-
Management submitted that the reference made by the State
Government to the learned Tribunal is bad in as much as the Registrar,
Co-operative Societies, Odisha so also Odisha State Co-operative
Bank were not arrayed as parties to the said reference, who are
necessary parties, for implementation of the direction given vide the
impugned Award passed by the learned Tribunal.
10.1 Learned Senior Counsel further argued that Odisha State
Co-operative Bank ought to have recommended the demands of the
Second Party-Union to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha,
Bhubaneswar for according necessary approval. In absence of any
such recommendation so also approval, the direction given vide
impugned Award for upward revision of Travelling Allowances to the
Cadre Secretaries, is bad and deserves interference.
10.2 Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel further argued that the
service condition of the employees of the First Party-Management is
being governed by the Staff Service Rules, 1980, which was
subsequently amended in the year 1984 and at present is being
governed by the Service Rules, 2011, whereas the service condition of
the Cadre Staff is being governed by a separate Cadre Rules. The
expenditure incurred towards salary and allowances etc. are being
borne out of the cadre fund. The First-Party Management so also
similarly placed all the Central Co-operative Banks in the State are
affiliated to Odisha State Co-operative Bank, which is the apex Bank.
The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar is the
authority for according necessary approval with regard to conditions of
services of the employees of the Central Co-operative Banks. Hence,
all the decisions regarding Cadre Staff are to be taken by the Registrar,
Co-operative Societies, Odisha as per the recommendation of the
Odisha State Co-operative Bank. The First Party-Management does
not have any such power/authority in the said regard. Despite bringing
the said facts to the notice of the learned Industrial Tribunal vide its
written submission; a perverse Award has been passed directing the
First Party-Management to implement the observation made vide the
impugned Award, which is beyond the authority of the Petitioner-
Bank.
10.3 However, during argument, learned Senior Counsel for the
First Party-Management brought to the notice of the Court that during
pendency of the present writ petition, pursuant to the order dated
22.07.2003 of the Government of Odisha, Cooperation Department,
followed by order dated 03.06.2003 of the Registrar, Co-operative
Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, vide Resolution No.8 dated
17.07.2003 in the Meeting of the Committee of Management, Aska
Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Aska, the Cadre Secretaries working
under Common Cadre Scheme of the Bank have been treated as
employees of the First Party-Management under Grade-VI-A category
and they have been allowed the prescribed scale of pay meant for the
said category with effect from 01.07.2003. The contents of the said
order dated 22.07.2003, being relevant, are extracted below:
"No.2343/Estt.-III ORDER Date: 22.7.03
In pursuance of the order No.ICR.35/2000(PT)
381/Coop. dated 20.2.2003 of the Govt. of Odisha,
Cooperation Department and order No.XX-7/2001(PT-II)
6929/Bank-10, dated 3.6.03 of the Registrar of Co-op.
Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar and the Resolution No.8
dated 17.7.03 of the Meeting of the Committee of
Management, Aska C.C. Bank Ltd., Aska, the Cadre
Secretaries working under Common Cadre Scheme of the
Bank are deemed as employees of Aska Co-op. Central
Bank Ltd., Aska under the Grade-VI-A of the Category of
the service. They are allowed the prescribed scale of pay
Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590/- with effect from 1.7.2003. they
should furnish their joining report along with the
agreement/bond on stamped paper to the Bank.
Before they submit their joining report as Bank
employee they must have to clear their audit recoveries such
as cash mistake/misappropriation, fertilizer shortage, stock
deficit and illegal advances availed or allowed within 45
days from the date of the order failing which their joining
report will not be accepted.
The interim relief of Rs.1000/- which was allowed
to the Cadre Secretaries will be paid as per circular
instruction under the aforesaid order of Govt. of Odisha, at
para No.9.
Sd/- K.S. Rao,
Secretary"
(Emphasis supplied)
10.4 Learned Senior Counsel for the First Party-Management
further submitted that, after the said order dated 22.07.2003, all the
Cadre Secretaries working in the First Party-Management Bank have
been treated as Grade-VI-A employee of the Bank and are being paid
all the facilities/service benefits at par with regular employees of the
Bank. Hence, for the interregnum period i.e. from the date of Award
dated 06.10.2001 till 31.06.2003, the members of the Second Party-
Union are not entitled for the benefits in terms of the impugned Award
passed in I.D. Case No.80 of 1994.
11. Per contra, Mr. Tripathy, learned Counsel for the Second
Party-Union, drawing attention of this Court to the Cadre Rules, 1980,
as at Annexure-1 to the writ petition, submitted that the said Rules
itself intend to improve the managerial efficiency of Primary
Agricultural Credit Co-operative Societies (PACS) and to ensure
uniform service conditions for such personnel working in the
PACS/LAMPCS and FSS. Because of the unjustified, unethical and
discriminatory policy of the First Party-Management in not extending
the legitimate benefits in favour of the members of the Second Party-
Union, it took a vague stand in its written statement filed before
learned Tribunal that the Cadre Secretaries, who are the members of
the Second Party-Union, are not employees of the Bank and hence, are
not enjoying the benefits at par with the bank employees.
11.1 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that even though a stand has
been taken before this Court that the reference made by the appropriate
Government is bad for not impleading the Registrar of Cooperative
Societies Odisha, as a party to the I.D. Case, no such stand was taken
before learned Industrial Tribunal in its Written Statement nor any
application was moved before learned Industrial Tribunal for
impleading the Registrar, Co-operative Societies so also the Odisha
State Co-operative Bank as parties to the said I.D. Case. Further, when
the charter of demands was given by the Second Party-Union pointing
out such discrepancies with regard to various service conditions of the
Cadre Secretaries of the Bank, the First Party-Management failed to
recommend such demands to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies,
Odisha, Bhubaneswar seeking approval, for which the appropriate
Government has rightly referred the demands of the Union for
adjudication with regard to various service conditions of the Cadre
Secretaries, including their scale of pay and other allowances at par
with the Junior Assistants of the Bank.
11.2 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that the Cadre Secretaries,
who have already been treated as Grade-VI-A employee of the Bank
with effect from 01.07.2003, are entitled to all the benefits in terms of
the impugned award dated 06.10.2001 in view of the applicability of
the Cadre Rules, 1980, which has been merged in the Central Co-
operative Banks Staff Rules, 1984 and again being merged in the latest
service Rules framed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,
Odisha, namely Human Resource Policy of the Central Co-operative
Banks of Odisha incorporating the Staff Service Rules, 2011.
11.3 Mr. Tripathy submitted that the service benefits allowed by
learned Tribunal in favour of the Cadre
Secretaries, who are members of the Second Party-Union, are very
nominal. The First Party-Management, instead of acting upon the said
award fairly, is unsuccessfully litigating the matter for the last 24
years.
11.4 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that though the writ petition
was preferred in the year 2001, on 14.12.2016, learned Counsel for the
First Party-Management expressed his inability to argue the matter
having received no instruction, for which the present writ petition was
dismissed. Thereafter, because of inaction of the First Party-
Management to implement the Award, the Second Party-Union
preferred W.P.(C) No.4023 of 2024 seeking appropriate direction to
the labour authorities to take action under Section 29 of the I.D. Act
for non-implementation of the Award by the First Party-Management.
The said writ petition stood disposed of at the stage of admission vide
order dated 26.02.2024 directing the Joint Labour Commissioner,
Berhampur, Assistant Labour Commissioner, Berhampur and District
Labour Officer, Berhampur to take necessary steps in terms of Section
29 of the I.D. Act. Pursuant to the said order dated 26.02.2024, the
District Labour Officer, Berhampur (Ganjam) wrote to the First Party-
Management for implementation of the said Award. In response to
such communication, the First Party-Management vide letter dated
14.03.2024, as at Annexure-C/2 to the Counter Affidavit, informed the
concerned District Labour Officer that CMAPL No.370 of 2017 was
pending before this Court for restoration of the present writ petition,
which was dismissed on 14.12.2016 due to want of instruction.
11.5 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that though the CMAPL
No.370 of 2017 was filed by the First Party-Management after 208
days of delay on 04.08.2017, the same was kept pending without
taking any initiative to expedite restoration of the present writ petition
to its file. Only after disposal of W.P.(C) No.4023 of 2024 on
26.02.2024, vide which direction was given to the labour authorities to
take necessary steps for implementation of the impugned award, the
First Party-Management took necessary steps for restoration of the
writ petition. The delay in preferring the application for restoration
was condoned vide order dated 23.08.2024 passed in Misc. Case
No.210 of 2017 subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-, followed
by order dated 14.11.2024 passed in CMAPL No.370 of 2017, vide
which the present writ petition was restored to its file, subject to
payment of cost of Rs.10,000/-.
11.6 Mr. Tripathy submitted that in Misc. Case No.16531 of
2001, a conditional order was passed on 20.12.2001 indicating therein
that the Award passed in I.D. Case No.80/94 shall remain stayed till
the next date subject to the condition that in case the Petitioner Bank
loses, the remuneration found payable to the Cadre Secretaries, shall
be paid along with interest @ 10% per annum. Thereafter, because of
non-appearance of the First Party-Management on 30.03.2016 and on
06.04.2016 and 9.12.2016, though the learned Counsel for the
Petitioner Management took adjournment, but the interim order was
not extended. Ultimately on 14.12.2016 the writ petition was
dismissed for non-prosecution due to want of instruction.
11.7 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that even if the writ petition
was restored to its original file vide order dated 14.11.2024 passed in
CMAPL No.370 of 2017, there is no interim order in vogue. Further,
no step has been taken by the Petitioner-Management for recall/
review of order dated 26.02.2024 passed by the coordinate Bench in
W.P.(C) No.4023 of 2024, which has attained finality.
11.8 Mr. Tripathy further submitted that, as per the settled
position of law, the Industrial Adjudicator is competent to adjudicate
demand of the Union regarding various service conditions of
Workmen. There being no infirmity in the impugned Award, the writ
petition deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost for
unnecessarily dragging the litigation for the last 24 years, despite
treating the Cadre Secretaries as Grade-VI-A employees of the Bank
and extending all the facilities with effect from 01.07.2003.
12. In view of the said submissions made by the learned
Counsel for the parties, on perusal of the averments so also documents
on record and the L.C.R. in I.D. Case No.80 of 1994, it is found that,
so far as Issue No.III is concerned, in view of the admission made vide
paragraph No.9 of the written statement filed by the First Party-
Management, read with the averments made in the Claim Statement so
also evidence on record, i.e. letter dated 08.11.1994 of the Bank
marked as Ext.8, learned Tribunal, while answering the said issue, has
rightly ordered that the three Ad hoc Cadre Secretaries, namely, Sri
Prakash Chandra Gouda, Prafulla Kumar Jena and Rajanikanta
Pattnaik should be regularised within a period of one month from the
date of publication of the Award, if it is found that they are yet to be
regularised as Cadre Secretaries.
12.1 Similarly, so far as Issue No.IV, a stand was taken before
learned Tribunal that even though the Cadre Rules does not provide
any clause for payment of bonus to the Cadre Personnel, the same is
being allowed to the Cadre Secretaries by the First Party-Management
with effect from 1994. However, so far as arrear bonus with effect
from 1986-87, as the Second Party-Union did not press for the said
demand, learned Tribunal rightly did not answer the said issue.
13. So far as Issue No.I regarding payment of D.A. to Cadre
Secretaries at par with Junior Clerks of the First Party-Management,
learned Tribunal took note of the untrustworthy evidences of W.W.1,
W.W.2, W.W.3 and W.W.4, including the Award passed by the
Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in case of Nayagarh Central Co-operative
Bank in I.D. Case No.48 of 1990, which was marked as Ext.14 vide
the said Award, it was held that the similarly placed Cadre Secretaries
of Nayagarh Central Co-operative Bank are the employees of the Bank
and they are entitled to the scale of pay and other entitlements at par
with bank employees. Accordingly, the Issue No.I was answered in
favour of the Second Party-Union holding that the Cadre Secretaries
are entitled to T.A/D.A @ Rs.35/- per day instead of Rs.25/- per day.
14. Similarly, so far as Issue No.II regarding extra payment to
the Cadre Secretaries for discharging dual responsibilities by
remaining in charge of two Societies, learned Tribunal took note of the
admission made by the First Party-Management in its written
statement vide which it was pleaded that most of the PACS are not
viable and are incurring huge loss and considering the loan outstanding
position of PACS, at times, the Cadre Secretaries are assigned with
dual responsibilities. Apart from that, taking into consideration the
undisputed deposition of W.W.3, instead of awarding Rs.200/- extra
amount in favour of the Cadre Secretaries as claimed, learned Tribunal
answered Issue No.II in favour of the disputant Union directing the
First Party-Management to pay an extra amount of Rs.150/- per month
to the Cadre Secretaries, who are directed to remain in charge of two
Societies, with an observation that such additional charge adds to the
regular burden which the Cadre Secretaries usually shoulder.
15. So far as Issue No.V regarding entitlement of pay scale and
D.A. of the Cadre Secretaries at par with Junior Assistants, taking note
of the evidence on record regarding the nature of duties and
responsibilities of the Cadre Secretaries vis-à-vis the nature of duties
and responsibility of the Junior Assistants, so also the documentary
evidences marked as Exts.10, 11 & 14 pertaining to Balasore District
Central Co-operative Bank, Angul United Central Co-operative Bank
and Nayagarh Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., learned Tribunal held
that the Members of Second Party-Union are entitled to the scale of
pay at par with Junior Assistants of the Bank along with usual D.A. as
admissible from time to time. Accordingly, it was directed to pay the
same within a period of three months from the date of publication of
the said Award.
16. It is pertinent to mention here that Ext.10 is the letter dated
5th August, 1982 of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Odisha
addressed to the President, Balasore District Central Co-operative
Bank Ltd., Balasore accepting the proposal of the said bank to treat the
Cadre Secretaries of the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society
(PACS) as employees of Central Co-operative Bank. Similarly, Ext.11
is the award dated 28th December, 1991 passed in I.D. Case No.19 of
1991 by Industrial Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, vide which, based
on a settlement in Form-K, as prescribed under Rule-64 of the Odisha
Industrial Disputes Rules, an award was passed for payment of revised
scale and other benefits to the Cadre Secretaries of the Angul United
Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. at par with Grade-VI-A employees of
the said bank with effect from 01.10.1984 along with incremental
benefits as per the Central Co-operative Bank Staff Service Rules,
1984. So far as Ext.14 is concerned, the same is an award dated
01.03.1996 passed in I.D. Case No.48 of 1990 by the Labour Court,
Bhubaneswar, vide which the Management of Nayagarh Central Co-
operative Bank Ltd. was directed to treat the Cadre Secretaries of the
said bank as its employees with all facilities admissible to bank
employees. Apart from that, it was held vide the said award that the
Cadre Secretaries are entitled to Grade-A salary. So far as Ext.15 is
concerned, which was also marked on admission, is the letter No.7843
dated 08.11.1994 of the Secretary, Balasore District Central Co-
operative Bank Ltd., Balasore, addressed to the Secretary, Aska Co-
operative Central Bank Ltd., Aska, wherein it has been intimated that
the Cadre Secretaries of the Balasore District Central Co-operative
Bank Ltd. have been fitted to Grade-VI-A and they are getting bonus
as per the Payment of Bonus Act. Apart from that, the other
documents were also marked as Exts.15/1 to 15/4 on admission from
the side of Second Party-Union pertaining to various service
conditions of Cadre Secretaries of Nayagarh District Central Co-
operative Bank Ltd., Khurda Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., United
Puri-Nimapara Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Bhawanipatana
Central Co-operative Bank. A query being made during hearing, it was
submitted at the Bar that the said Awards passed by the Tribunal so
also Labour Court have already been implemented since long. On
examination of Exts.11 & 14, it is found that in I.D. Case No.19 of
1991 so also I.D. Case No.48 of 1990, the Registrar, Co-operative
Societies, Odisha was not a party to the said proceeding. Still the said
Awards were implemented by the Management of the concerned
Central Co-operative Banks.
17. Admittedly, pursuant to the award dated 06.10.2001 passed
in I.D. Case No.80 of 1994, even though there was no such direction
given by learned Tribunal to treat the Cadre Secretaries as Grade-VI-A
employees, the First Party-Management, pursuant to order of the
Government of Odisha, Cooperation Department vide order dated
20.02.2003, followed by order dated 03.06.2003 of the Registrar,
Cooperative Societies Odisha, Bhubaneswar, resolved to treat the
Cadre Secretaries of the Bank as Grade-VI-A employees of the Bank
with proper scale of pay with effect from 01.07.2003. Though the
award has been challenged on technical ground that the same is not
implementable in absence of Odisha State Co-operative Bank so also
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Odisha as parties to the said I.D.
Case but, no where it has been pleaded in the writ petition so also by
filing additional affidavit that pursuant to the impugned Award passed
by the learned Tribunal, though the Registrar Co-operative Societies,
Odisha, Bhubaneswar was approached seeking necessary approval for
implementation of the said Award, no such approval was accorded. A
plea was taken in the Written Statement filed before learned Tribunal
so also before this Court that Cadre Secretaries are guided as per the
Cadre Rules formulated by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,
Odisha vide circular dated 13.03.1980 and they are appointed by the
Cadre Committee and posted to the Societies to safeguard the interest
of the Society, i.e., PACS and any extra financial benefits and other
service benefits to the Cadre Secretaries cannot be extended in their
favour without the approval of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies,
Odisha, Bhubaneswar. But contrary to the said stand in para-12 of the
Written Statement filed in I.D. Case, it has been stated that financial
benefits like bonus, surrender leave and medical allowances have been
extended to the cadre personnel by the Cadre Committee and due to
the weak financial position of PACS, such benefits have been
extended to the Cadre Secretaries out of the general fund of the Bank
to avoid discontentment. Neither it has been stated in the written
statement nor was any evidence led by the Management before learned
Tribunal that to meet such financial burden out of the general fund of
the bank, necessary approval was accorded by the Register,
Cooperative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar. Hence, this Court is of
the view that the stand taken by the First Party-Management that the
Award passed by learned Tribunal is non-implementable in absence of
Register, Cooperative Societies, Odisha as party to the said case is
unsustainable.
18. Apart from the technical ground as to not impleading the
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Odisha as party to the I.D. Case, a
stand has also been taken in the writ petition that the findings of
learned Tribunal are perverse. But no such specific ground has been
urged in the writ petition to demonstrate before this Court as to
perversity in the award impugned in the present writ petition.
19. It may not be out of place to mention here that the coordinate
Bench, vide order dated 26.02.2024 passed in W.P.(C) N.4023 of 2024,
directed implementation of the impugned Award passed in Industrial
Dispute Case No.80 of 1994. Knowing so, though the Petitioner-
Management expedited listing and disposal of CMAPL No.370 of
2017, but till date did not take any steps for recalling the said order
passed by the coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No.4023 of 2024, vide
which the Labour Authorities were directed to take action for non-
implementation of the impugned award passed in I.D. Case No.80 of
1994. The said order is reproduced below for ready reference.
"Order dated 26.02.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.4023 of 2024
1. Mr. Tripathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of
petitioner who is the sangha. It has taken up cause of the
workman. He submits, award dated 6th October, 2001
was made in favour of the workman regarding his scale of
pay, yet not implemented. In the meantime, the
management made unsuccessful attempt to challenge the
award.
2. Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional
Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and
points out from annexures-4 and 6, respectively the
District Labour Officer made communication dated 24th
May, 2023 followed up by reminder dated 4th January,
2024, requesting the management to implement the
award.
3. On query from Court Mr. Tripathy submits, the
award has become final.
4. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to direct
issuance of notice to the management. Instead we direct
opposite party nos.3 to 5 to take steps for complaint being
lodged in proper Court under section 29 of Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, for urging penalty be imposed on the
management for noncompliance with the award. The
complaint under section 29 must be filed in the Court
within two weeks from communication, unless there is
compliance in the meantime. In this regard, reference may
be made to notification dated 5th July, 1991 followed up
by circular dated 3rd October, 1991 of the Labour
Commissioner.
5. Petitioner is at liberty to communicate website copy
of this order on the management as well as opposite party
nos.3 to 5, who are to act thereupon.
6. The writ petition is disposed of."
20. So far as the limits of the jurisdiction of High Courts in a
writ of certiorari, the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Syed Yakoob Vs. K.S. Radhakrishnan and others, reported in
AIR 1964 SC 477, held as follows:
"7. The question about the limits of the jurisdiction of
High Courts in issuing a writ of certiorari under Art. 226
has been frequently considered by this Court and the true
legal position in that behalf is no longer in doubt. A writ
of certiorari can be issued for correcting errors of
jurisdiction committed by inferior courts or tribunals :
these are cases where orders are passed by inferior
courts or tribunals without jurisdiction, or is in excess of
it, or as a result of failure to exercise jurisdiction. A writ
can similarly be issued where in exercise of jurisdiction
conferred on it, the Court or Tribunal acts illegally or
improperly, as for instance, it decides a question without
giving an opportunity to be heard to the party affected by
the order, or where the procedure adopted in dealing
with the dispute is opposed to principles of natural
justice. There is, however, no doubt that the jurisdiction
to issue a writ of certiorari is a supervisory jurisdiction
and the Court exercising it is not entitled to act as an
appellate Court. This limitation necessarily means that
findings of fact reached by the inferior Court or
Tribunal as result of the appreciation of evidence cannot
be reopened or questioned in writ proceedings. An error
of law which is apparent on the face of the record can be
corrected by a writ, but not an error of fact, however
grave it may appear to be. In regard to a finding of fact
recorded by the Tribunal, a writ of certiorari can be
issued if it is shown that in recording the said finding,
the Tribunal had erroneously refused to admit
admissible and material evidence, or had erroneously
admitted inadmissible evidence which has influenced the
impugned finding. Similarly, if a finding of fact is based
on no evidence, that would be regarded as an error of
law which can be corrected by a writ of certiorari. In
dealing with this category of cases, however, we must
always bear in mind that a finding of fact recorded by
the Tribunal cannot be challenged in proceedings for a
writ of certiorari on the ground that the relevant and
material evidence adduced before the Tribunal was
insufficient or inadequate to sustain the impugned
finding. The adequacy or sufficiency of evidence led on
a point and the inference of fact to be drawn from the
said finding are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Tribunal, and the said points cannot be agitated before a
writ Court. It is within these limits that the jurisdiction
conferred on the High Courts under Art. 226 to issue a
writ of certiorari can be legitimately exercised (vide Hari
Vishnu Kamath v. Ahmad Ishaque, 1955-1 SCR 1104: ((S)
AIR 1955 SC 233): Nagendra Nath v. Commr. of Hills
Division, 1958 SCR 1240: (AIR 1958 SC 398) and
Kaushalya Devi v. Bachittar Singh, AIR 1960 SC 1168."
(Emphasis Supplied)
21. In view of the elaborative award and detailed discussion
made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that learned Tribunal
has well discussed the relevant issues to be considered for
answering the reference. In that view of the matter, more
particularly the admitted pleadings and evidence on record so also
settled position of law, as detailed above, this Court finds no
infirmity in the impugned Award under Annexure-4 deserving
interference.
22. Accordingly, the impugned award stands confirmed. The
writ petition, being devoid of any merit, stands dismissed. In the
facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to
costs.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K.Mishra)
Judge
The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Dated the 27th day of May, 2025/ Prasant
Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 27-May-2025 14:23:51
