LexCHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. versus ALL ORISSA STATE BANK OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
·• • CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. A v. ALL ORISSA STA TE BANK OFFICERS ASSOCtA TION AND ORS. MAY6,2002 [D.P. MOHAPATRA AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] B Trade Union Act, 1926: Non-Recognised Association-Certain rights are vested in terms of Trade Unions Act and Rules framed thereunder which acknowledge its C existence. Recognised Associations and Non-Recognised Associations-Rights- Distinction between-Discussed Non-recognised Association-Rights of-Held, it could discuss with D the management/employer about the grievances of its members and may represent an individual member in domestic inquiry/departmental inquiry and proceedings before the Conciliation Officer/adjudication. Staff Circular No. 9111987 issued by State Bank of India-Validity of- Held, the Bank Management has decided not to have discussion with Office E bearers of Non-recognised Association-Thus, it is contrary to express provisions of Verification Rules and provisions of the Trade Union Act Verification of Membership and Recognition of Trade Union Rules, I 994; Rule 24. '' Respondent No.I filed a Writ Petition challenging Staff Circular No. F 91 of 1987, whereby the non-recognised Association was debared to enter into any dialogue with the Bank, grievance was also raised against unjust, unfair and hostile treatment towards its members and claiming equal treatment at par with recognised associations. The Management of the Bank did not recognise the Respondent Association as it had not satisfied the criteria laid G down in the Verification of Membership and Recognition of Trade Union Rules, 1994 framed by the Government ofOrissa. In the petition, it was alleged that inspite of recommendation by the Local Head Office, the Central Office did not take proper action in the matter and instead started adopting unfair labour practice to encourage defection in the Association and that its members were 797 H 798 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] 3 S.C.R. A put to various inconveniences in a calculated manner, on the other hand, members of the recognised Associations were given undue and illegal favour in the matters of posting, transfer etc. The Writ Petition was disposed of by the High Court by setting aside para-2 of the Circular and the Management was directed to confer such rights B on the petitions-Non-recognised Association as available under Rule 24 of the Verification Rules. Review Petition filed by the appellant-Bank was partly allowed by the High Court. Hence these appeals. c Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. Non-recognised unions may not have the right to participate in the process of collective bargaining with the management/employer over issues concerning the workmen in general, but they have the right to meet and discuss with the employer or any person appointed by him on issues relating to grievances of any individual member regarding his service D conditions and to appeal on behalf of their members in any domestic or departmental enquiry held by the employer or before the conciliation officer or Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal. In essence, the distinction between the two categories of trade unions is that while a recognized union has the right to participate in the discussions/negotiations regarding general issues E affecting all workmen/employees and settlement, if any, arrived at as a result of such discussion/negotiations, which is binding on all workmen/employees, a non-recognized union cannot claim such a right, but it has the right to meet and discuss with the management/employer about the grievance of any individual member relating to his service conditions a~~ to represent an .individual member in domestic inquiry or departmental inquiry and proceedings F before the conciliation officer and adjudicator. (805-E-F-G-H] 1.2. The very fact that certain rights are vested in a non-recognized union shows that the Trade Union Act and the Rules framed there under acknowledge the existence of a non-recognized union. The management/employer cannot G outrightly refuse to have any discussjon with a non-recognized union in matters relating to service conditions of individual members and other matters incidental thereto. And that the right of the citizens of this country to form an association or union is recognized under the Constitution in Article 19(1)(c). • (805-H, 806-A-B) H 1.3. Management should act in a manner which helps in uniting its ... • • CHAIRMA
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.