JUDGMENT
Nishita Mhatre, J.
1. The question involved in this petition is whether the respondent-bank was entitled to make deductions from the salaries of Grade I and II officers towards Union levy and Employees Welfare Trust and not remit the same to petitioner which is a representative union.
2. The facts in this case are not disputed. The petitioner Union, which is a representative union under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act for employees in the Banking industry for Pune city cantonment and Talukas in Pune district, entered into an agreement under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act. This agreement was preceded by a resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent-Bank setting out the terms of the settlement. In Clause 20 of the resolution, it was stated that out of the arrears payable to the employees covered by the settlement 10% would be remitted as levy and 5% towards the employees welfare trust to the petitioner Union. Under Clause 26 of the Resolution, it was mentioned that an agreement would be entered into between the Sangh, that is, the petitioner Union and the respondent-Bank. Accordingly, on 19-4-1993, the Sangh and the Bank entered into a settlement for an upward revision of wages and other service conditions. By Clause 19 of the settlement, it was agreed that 10% would be deducted from the arrears towards the Union levy and 5% for the Trust. This amount was to be deducted at source by the Bank and paid over to the Sangh. The settlement took into consideration various categories of employees. These included Grade I officers, Grade II officers, junior agents, head cashier, etc. The amounts payable were released as allowances and other benefits mentioned in the agreement.
3. It appears that the Bank made deductions from the amounts payable to Grade I and II officers towards contribution to the Union levy and to the Trust. This amount was not paid over to the Sangh and was in fact retained by the Bank. The Sangh had called upon the Bank to implement the settlement, especially Clause 19 thereof, which was in respect of the levy and contribution to the Trust. Due to an unfavourable response from the Bank, the petitioner filed a complaint under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act. The complaint was resisted by the respondent Bank by contending that the grade I and grade II officers were not employees as defined under Section 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act; therefore, the amounts deducted from the arrears payable to them was not required to be paid over to the Sangh. The evidence of the President of the Sangh was led on behalf of the petitioner. The Bank examined an in-charge officer in the Administration, grade I. The Industrial Court on the basis of the evidence led before it, came to the conclusion that the Bank was not liable to remit the amounts deducted in respect of Grade I and II officers towards union levy and towards the Trust to the Sangh. The complaint came to be dismissed as the Industrial Court was of the view that the grade I and grade II officers did not fall under the definition of an ’employee’ under the BIR Act.
4. There is no dispute that the Bank has deducted the amounts from the arrears payable to grade I and II officers. The only question is whether the amounts should be paid over to the complainants. The agreement entered into between the Sangh and the Bank clearly mentions in Clause 19 that 10% would be deducted by the Bank towards the Union levy and 5% of the amount towards the employee welfare trust from the amount of arrears payable under the settlement to the employees covered by the settlement. There is no dispute that certain amounts such as special travel concession, etc. were to be paid to not only the lower grade staff but also the grade I and II officers. Despite the resolution stating that the agreement would be in respect of those covered by the BIR Act, agreement dated 19-4-1993, which is a subsequent document includes grade I and II officers. Even the payscales for these grades have been stipulated by the settlement besides various other allowances.
5. Therefore, in my view, the Industrial Court has erred in concluding that grade I and II officers are not covered by the settlement and that any deductions made from their arrears are not payable to Sangh. All deductions made from them in respect of 10% towards union levy and 5% towards the Trust would have to be paid over by the Bank to the Sangh. There is no doubt that by retaining the amount, the Bank has committed an unfair labour practice under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act.
6. In the result, Rule made absolute with no order as to costs. The Bank shall pay the amount along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the deductions. This amount shall be remitted to the Sangh within eight weeks from today.
7. Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.