High Court Kerala High Court

Nirmala Xaviour vs Karannur Service Co-Op.Bank Ltd. … on 12 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Nirmala Xaviour vs Karannur Service Co-Op.Bank Ltd. … on 12 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 2671 of 2009(R)


1. NIRMALA XAVIOUR , SENIOR CLERK,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD. F.1244
                       ...       Respondent

2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

3. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.MOHANAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.JACOB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :12/06/2009

 O R D E R
                 ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
               ---------------------
           W.P.(C)s.No. 36732/08 & 2671/09
            ------------------------
          Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009.

                       JUDGMENT

WP(c).No.36732/08 is filed by the Karannur SCB LTD

and WP(c).No.2671/09 is filed by one of its workmen, Smt.

Nirmala Xavier.

2. For convenience I shall refer to the exhibits marked

in WP(c).No.2671/09. The employee joined the Society on

21.8.1986. On the allegation that she had committed

certain misconduct, she was suspended on 22.9.1990 and

was compulsorily retired from service by the order dated

31.5.1991. This dispute was the subject matter of ID.

No.33/93 on the file of the Labour Court, Kozhikode.

Labour Court passed Ext.P1 award directing the

management to reinstate the employee with continuity of

service and payment of Rs.25,000/- in lieu of backwages.

The society filed O.P.No.14892/00 before this court

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 2

challenging the award and pursuant to the interim orders that

were passed, Rs.25,000/- ordered to be paid in the award

was paid to the employee in two instalments.

3. During the pendency of the original petition, the

employee filed Ext.P4, before the President of the society,

referring to certain discussions that she had with the President

and Secretary of the Society and suggesting settlement of the

dispute, subject to the terms and conditions in Ext.P2. Based

on Ext.P4, the society passed Ext.P5 resolution dated

8.3.2002 in WP(c).No.2671/09 and it was resolved to appoint

the petitioner, as a junior clerk, for the time being, with

continuity of service. Accordingly, by Ext.P6 order dated

11.3.2002, the employee was reinstated in service as junior

clerk. It is also seen that following her reinstatement, the

counsel for the Bank who filed a memo in O.P.No.14892/00

challenged Ext.P1 award and accordingly by Ext.P8 judgment

dated 9.4.2002 the original petition was dismissed as

withdrawn.

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 3

4. While the employee was continuing in service, on

30.6.2000 one Sri. Balan, Secretary of the Society attained the

age of superannuation and retired from service. Accordingly,

consequential vacancies arose and petitioner contends that in

the consequential vacancy of Accountant, she ought to have

been promoted, having regard to the fact that the

reinstatement was with continuity to service. This was not

accepted by the Bank and Bank promoted and posted some

other persons. There upon the employee moved the Joint

Registrar, claiming promotion to the post of Accountant and

that was rejected by Ext.P9 order. Her representation to the

Registrar also was rejected by Ext.P10. It is stated that she

moved the Government by filing Ext.P5 in WP(c).No.36732/08

and the Government by Ext.P12 order allowed her appeal. The

Government held that the decision of the Joint Registrar was

arbitrary and the Bank was directed to reinstate the employee

in service with effect from 30.5.1991, the date on which she

was given compulsory retirement, that her seniority should

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 4

be restored that she is entitled to continuous service.

5. In WP(c).No.36732/08 filed by the Bank they are

challenging the aforesaid order of the Government ,which is

produced as Ext.P5 in the writ petition. In WP(c).No.2671/09,

the employee is praying for, extension of the benefit of the

award, as confirmed in Ext.P5 referred to above, which is also

produced as Ext.P12.

6. Admittedly, by the award rendered by the Labour

Court, kozhikode in I.D.No.33/93 Bank was to reinstate the

employee with continuity of service and to pay Rs.25000/- in

lieu of backwages. It is true that, by Ext.P4 referred to above,

the employee agreed to forfeit several benefits arising under

the award but demanded that she should be reinstated as

junior clerk with continuity of service. It was this request of

the employee which was accepted by the Bank as can be seen

from Ext.P5 restoration and it was resolved that the employee

shall be reinstated as junior clerk for the present. This

evidently means that the Bank has recognized its obligation to

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 5

accommodate the employee in a post higher to that of junior

clerk but however had chosen to accommodate her as junior

clerk for the present, ” in view of its ow exigencies.” If that be

so, when a vacancy of a higher post to which the employee

was eligible arose as a result of the retirement of the Secretary

of the Bank, necessarily the Bank ought to have

accommodated the employee in that vacancy.

7. A view different from this, will run counter to the

terms offered by the employee in Ext.P4 and accepted by the

Bank in Ext.P5 resolution. Moreover that will also result in

forfeiture of all benefits that the employee derived under the

award rendered by the Labour Court, Kollam which has

become final and binding between the parties. If so, he refusal

of the Bank in not accommodating the employee in the

consequent vacancy of the Secretary is clearly erroneous and

to that extent Ext.P12 order of the Govt. needs to be

confirmed.

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 6

8. However, a reading of Ext.P12 which is challenged by

the Bank in WP(c).No.36732/08 shows that the Government

have directed restoration of the entire benefits which were

granted in the award rendered by the Labour Court. From

Exts.P4 and P5 it is evident that the employee has offered

certain sacrifices which were accepted by the Bank. This is

totally ignored by the Government which passing Ext.P12

order. In such circumstances the Government was not justified

in granting entire benefits to the employee. Therefore Ext.P12

cannot be sustained in full.

Accordingly, it is declared that the employee, petitioner

in WP(c).No.2671/01 ought to have been promoted by the

Bank in the consequential vacancy of Accountant which as a

result of the retirement of the Secretary of the Bank with effect

from 30.6.2000. The Government Order produced as Ext.P12

in WP(c).No.2761/09 and Ext.P6 in WP(c).No.36732/08 to the

extent it orders restoration of the entire benefits awarded in

I.D.No.33/03 will set aside to that extent and it is directed that

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 7

the employee will be given the benefits as provided in Exts.P4

and P5 referred to above.

Writ Petitions are disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/

WP(c).No.36732/08 & anor. 8