Patna High Court
Senior Branch Manager, Bank Of India vs The State Of Bihar on 1 May, 2024
Author: A. Abhishek Reddy
Bench: A. Abhishek Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8338 of 2021
======================================================
1. Senior Branch Manager, Bank of India Triveni Apartment, Khalifa Bagh
Chowk, Bhagalpur.
2. Senior Branch Manager, Bank of India, Devdoot Complex, Radha Rani
Sinha Road, Adampur, Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Department of Labour, Govt. of Bihar through its
Secretary.
2. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhagalpur.
3. Baijnath Adhiklal Sharma @ Baidyanath Sharma, Son of Late Adhiklal
Thakur, Resident of Sanhauli, P.O.- Kahua, P.S. Sangrampur, District -
Munger.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv.
: Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Adv.
: Ms. Dilkash Khan, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Shri Nandan Nayan, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-05-2024
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
"(i). For issuance of appropriate
writ/order/direction for quashing judgment/order
dated 15.11.2019 passed by the respondent No. 2
(Annexure-P/10) by which the learned Labour Court,
Bhagalpur has directed the Bank of India to pay within
30 days from the date of order all retiral benefits,
grauity, bonus, GPF/EPF etc. with 12% interest and
pay pension and other benefits as per rules till
he(petitioner) is alive.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
2/7
(ii). For issuance of other appropriate
writ/direction/order which the petitioner in the facts
and circumstances of this case be found entitled to."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed
the order dated 15.11.2019 passed by the Labour Court,
Bhagalpur in favour of the respondent No. 3 herein. Learned
counsel has assailed the said order on the ground that the
Labour Court without having the jurisdiction and after lapse
of more than 18 years has passed the order directing the
payment of the compensation to the respondent No. 3 without
there being any iota of evidence. Learned counsel has further
stated that the respondent No. 3 was initially appointed in the
year 1983 as an armed guard in one of the branches of the
Bank. That in the year 1994 a mishap took place in the
premises one of the branches wherein the respondent No. 3
was injured. Though, the respondent No. 3 was given the
necessary treatment, he was unable to discharge his duties and
he voluntarily gave his resignation to this post on 22.09.1994
with a request to adjust his retirement benefits/provident
fund/gratuity against the outstanding amount. Thereafter, on
01.10.1994
, the wife of the respondent No. 3 informed the
bank authorities that respondent No. 3 without informing
anybody has left the house. That the resignation submitted by
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
the respondent No. 3 was processed and accepted by the Bank
on 18.10.1994. That the respondent No. 3 on 20.10.1994 has
again approached the Bank with a request to rejoin and
seeking to withdraw the resignation. However, the said
request was rejected on 22.10.1994. Thereafter, the respondent
No. 3 has again made another request on 31.10.1994 and
subsequently on 19.07.1995 a legal notice has been issued on
behalf of the respondent No. 3 to which a suitable reply was
issued by the Bank on 30.08.1995. That the respondent No. 3
has approached this Hon'ble Court by way of CWJC No.
11236 of 1995 and the CWJC was dismissed by this Hon'ble
Court on 16.01.1997. That the respondent No. 3 after a period
of more than 18 years has approached the Labour Court
seeking compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act,
1923. That the Labour Court without giving any finding on
the delay or laches and contrary to the evidence on record has
directed the respondent-Bank to pay the gratuity, leave
encashment bonus, GPF/EPF with 12% interest and pension
with other benefits. Learned counsel has assailed the said
order on the grounds of laches and stated that once the
resignation of the respondent No. 3 has been accepted by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
Bank, the question of paying any pension to the respondent
No. 3 does not arise.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent
No. 3 has vehemently opposed the very maintainability of the
present writ petition and stated that the respondent No. 3 has
lost his leg during the course of his employment in a shooting
incident at one of the branches. That the respondent No. 3 is
entitled to the compensation as he was injured during the
course of employment. Further, it is stated by the learned
counsel that the statutory amounts which were due to the
petitioners have to be necessary paid to the respondent No. 3
and, therefore, the question of delay or laches does not arise.
Learned counsel has therefore, prayed this Court to dismiss
the present writ petition.
5. This Court vide order dated 21.04.2023 had
directed the GM (Legal) and GM (HR) to examine the issue
involved in this CWJC and come up with a settlement
proposal. Pursuant to which, the Bank has filed a second
supplementary affidavit wherein, the following proposal has
been placed as under;
(i)
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
Gratuity Rs. 15,965/-
Interest @ 12% from 22.09.1995 to Rs. 48,182/- Rs. 64,147/-
15.11.2019 i.e. 25.15 yrs.
(ii)
Leave Encashment Not entitled
Not payable since he resigned prior
to 01.04.2001.
(iii)
Provident Fund without adjustment Rs. 49,100/-
Interest @ 12% from 17.10.1997 to Rs. 1,30,096/- Rs. 1,79,197/-
15.11.2019
(iv)
Bonus Rs. 1,354.20/-
Interest Rs. 4,086.90 Rs. 5,441/-
6. Thereafter, when the matter was listed for hearing on
on 16.04.2024, this Court has again directed the Bank to come up
with the calculation sheet showing the amount payable to the
petitioners under the various heads like provident fund, bonus,
compensation and interest till date. Pursuant to which, the fourth
supplementary affidavit has been filed, giving the particulars of the
amounts payable to the petitioners along with the interest
calculated up to 16.04.2024;
S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.)
1 Interest @ 12% on PF 1,56,138.00
2 Bonus and Interest 6,161.06
3 Compensation 1,34,710.33
Total 2,97,009.39
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
7. Even though, the learned counsel for the respondent
No. 3 has tried to argue on the merits of the case, he could not
come up with any plausible explanation for the delay of 18 years
in approaching the Labour Court. Further, as seen from the order
of the Labour Court, absolutely no reasons have been given by the
Labour Court for reaching the conclusion arrived at and directing
the payment of pension to the respondent No. 3. Once the
resignation of the respondent No. 3 is accepted and acted upon, the
respondent No. 3 ceases to be an employee of the Bank. Therefore,
the question of paying any pension does not arise at this point of
time. If the respondent had a grievance with the acceptance of his
resignation, he ought to have challenged the said acceptance, but
for reasons best known kept quite for a period of more than 18
years. The conclusion reached by the Labour Court is not only
perverse but contrary to the well settled principles of law,
therefore, the order to the extent of directing the authorities to pay
the pension and other retirement benefits are liable to be set aside
and the same is accordingly set aside. However, duly taking note
of the fact that the Bank authorities have themselves come forward
with a proposal to pay interest on the provident
fund/bonus/compensation under the Employees Compensation
Act, 1923 which comes to a total amount of Rs. 2,97,009.39 Lakhs
Patna High Court CWJC No.8338 of 2021 dt.01-05-2024
(Two Lakh Ninety Seven Thousand Nine). Having regard to the
fact that the respondent No. 3 has lost his leg due to the bullet
injuries sustained during the course of the employment. This Court
is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served if the
total compensation payable by the petitioner-Bank is enhanced to
Rs. 5 lakhs (Rs. Five Lakhs) payable to the respondent No. 3.
8. The above amounts shall be paid to the respondent
No. 3 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. With the above direction, the CWJC stands disposed
of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
Ayush/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.05.2024.
Transmission Date NA
