LexTHE BHARAT BANK LTD., DELHI versus EMPLOYEES OF THE BHARAT BANK LTD., DELHI
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
~.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
459
a sound basis for invoking the discretion of this Court
in granting special leave.
Generally speaking, this
Court will not grant special leave, unless it is shown
that exceptional and special circumstances exist, that
substantial and grave injustice has been done and that
the case in question presents features of sufficient
gravity to warrant a review of the decision appealed
against. Since the present case does not in our opinion
fulfil any of these conditions, we cannot interfere w.ith
the decision of the High Court, and the appeal must be
dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Agent for the appellant: S. P. Varma.
Agent for the respondent: P, A. Mehta.
THE BHARAT BANK LTD., DELHI
v.
EMPLOYEES OF THE BHARAT BANK LTD.,
DELHI
and
THE BHARAT BANK EMPLOYEES' UNION,
DELHI
UNION OF INDIA: INTERVENER.
(SHRI liARILAL KANIA C.J., SAIYID FAZL ALI,
PATANJALI SASTR,I, MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN,
and M UKHERJEA J J.]
Conititution of In&ia, A.rt. 136-Siiprc~ Court-Appellate
Jurisdiction-Award of Industri~ Tribw1al-Whether appealable-
l950
Pritam Singh
V;
The Stal<J
Fa:t .UiJ.
1950
May 26.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(1950]
1950
Applicatio1' f<Yr special leave-Maintainability-Nai!tre of functiois
of Industrial. Tribmial-Industrial Di•putes Act, 19'17, ss. 8, 16-
Bhural Ba"k Ud. Case heard by Bench of three memb,rs.
v.
Held
per KANIA C.J., FAZL ALI,
and
MAHAJAN J,T,
Bh~;!loi::=~ 'f.d. (MUKHERJEA and PATANJALI SASTRI J.J. dissenting).-The func-
tions and duties of the Industrial Tribunal constituted under the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are very much like those of a body
discharging judicial functions although it is not a Court, and under
Art. 136 of the Constitution of India the Supreme Court has
jurisdiction to entertain an application for leave to appeal ft·om
a decision of the Tribunal, even though It will be very reluctant
to entertain such an application. ·
Ka~ia C.J.
Per 'MUKHERJEA J. (PATANJALI SASTRI J. concurring).-An
Industtial Tribunal functioning under the Industrial Disputes Act
is not a judicial tribunal. The nature of the i!eterminations made
by it and the materials and considerations on which it has to decide
a dispute are also such that the powers of an appellate court cannot
be exercised fully and effectively in respect of them and such
determinations are therefore ontside the pur\'iew of Art. 136 of
·the Constitntion. Even assuming that the Court had jurisdiction
to entertain an appeal, 'the present case was not a fit one for enter~
taining an appeal from the determination of the Tribunal.
[On the merits KANIA C.J., FAZL ALI, PATANJALI SASTRI and
MUKHERJEA, JJ. were of opinion that there was no ground for
admitting the appeal.
MAHAJAN J. was of opinion that the award
was bad and must be set aside.)
APPELLATE
JURISDICTION:
Civil Appeal No.
XXXIV of 1950.
Appeal by special leave from an Award of the
All-Ind1a Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes) Bom-
bay, dated 1st January, 1950. The facts of the case
are set out in the judgment.
Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand (Veda Vyas and S. K.
Kapur, with him) for the appellant.
B. Sen for the respondents.
Alladi Krishnaswami Aiyar (Jindra Lal, with him)
for the Union of India.
1950. May 26. The Court delivered judgment as
follows:-'
KANIA C.J- I have read the judgments prepared
by Messrs. Fa1ll Ali, Mahajan and Mukherjea JJ.
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
461
in this case.
As the views in
those judgments in
1950
respect of the nature of the duties and functions of
the Industrial Tribunal do not
show agreement I Bharat Bank r.u.
consider it necessary to add a few words of my own.
Emf>l;·.ces 01
In my opinion, the functions and duties of the Bharat ia111, cu.
Industrial Tribunal are very much like those of a body
discharging j\;1dicial fuqctions, although it is not -a
/{auia c .f.
Court. The rules framed by the Tribunal require
evidence to be taken and witnesses to be examined,
cross-examined and re-examined. The Act constitut-
ing the Tribunal imposes penalties for incorrect state-
ments made before the Tribunal. While the powers
of the Industrial Tribunal in some respects are differ-
ent from those of an ordinary civil Court and it has
jurisdiction and powers to give reliefs which a civil
Court administering the law of the land (for instance,
ordering the reinstatemwt of a workman) does not
possess in the discharge of its duties it is essentially
working as a judicial Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.