NDLI: Indian Bank Vs. K. Usha and Anr. Etc. Etc.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	18(3) 45(9) and 45(14) Banking Regulation Act 1949 : Ss. 2 18(1)
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) Banking Regulation Act (10 of 1949)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Banking Regulation Act, 1949 :Ss.2, 18(1) 18(3), 45(9) and (45(14)-Amalgamation of Thanjavur Bank with Indian Bank-Claim for appointment on compassionate ground by dependents of employees who died while in service with transferor bank-Scheme of Amalgamation indicating no provision on this topic-Claim based on a Settlement entered into in 1982 between the Union of employees of transferor bank and its management under s.2{p) of Industrial Disputes Act Settlement not arrived at in conciliation proceedings-Held the Settlement u/s 2(p) r/ s. 18(1) of l.D.Act would get transmitted to transferee bank on combined operation of s.19(J)(d) of Specific Relief Act and s.2 of the Act- Transferee bank liable to appoint claimants in service-Industrial Disputes Act, I 947-S.s.2(p), 18(1) and 18(3)- Specific Relief Act, I 963-S.19(1)(d)- Service Law-Appointment on compassionate ground The Bank of Thanjavur Limited was amalgamated with the Indian Bank with effect from 20th February 1990 in accordance with the Scheme of Amalgamation framed under Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Clause 2 of the scheme provided for transfer of the property rights and assets of the Bank of Thanjavur (transferor bank) to the Indian Bank (transferee bank) and prescribed that all the corresponding liablilities, duties and obligations of the transferor bank would become liabilities, duties and obligations of the transferee bank. Clause 10 of the Scheme provided that all the employees of the transferor bank would continue in service and be deemed to have been appointed by the transferee bank at the same remuneration and the terms and conditions of service as were applicable to such employees immediately before the close of business on 19th August 1989. The respondents, the heirs and legal representatives of the employees who died while in service of the Bank of Thanjavur, claimed appointments on compassionate ground on the basis of an agreement of the year 1982 entered into between the Union of the employees of the transferor bank with its Management under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, albeit the Settlement was not arrived at during the conciliation proceedings. The appellant bank refused to entertain the claims. The writ petitions filed '. by the respondents were allowed by the Single Judge of the High Court holding that they were entitled to get the benefit of the Settlement which was binding not only on the transferor bank but also on its successor in interest namely the appellant bank. Since the appellant bank rejected the claim of the respondents Single Judge issued writ of Mandamus directing the appellants bank to appoint the respondents on compassionate ground. The writ appeals of the bank were dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. Aggrieved, the Indian Bank filed the present appeals. It was contended for the appellant bank that the High Court erred in issuing mandamus to the appellant to appoint the respondents in service. It was submitted that the Scheme of Amalgamation limited the liability of the transferor bank only to the extent provided in Clause 10 which pertained to the then existing employees of the transferor bank and did not cover the D liability under the 1982 Settlement to provide compassionate appointment to the heirs of deceased employees of the transferor bank, and thus, in view of sub-sections (9) and (14) of S.45 of the Banking Regulation Act, the Scheme by incorporating Clause 10 had made a contrary provision on the topic of granting compassionate appointment; that in any case the 1982 settlement arrived at between the management of the transferor bank and the Union of its employees would only bind the parties to the settlement as per Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and could not be enforced against the transferee bank; and that even if the respondents were found to be eligible to get employment, the High Court could not have issued the directions to appoint them in the absence of vacancies available.For the respondents it was contended that on a conjoint reading of Section 2 of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Section 19(1 )( d) of the Specific Relief Act, the 1982 Settlement would be binding on the appellant bank; that even if two views were possible on the construction of relevant provisions of the Scheme and the Act, a construction which fructifies the benevolent scheme underlying the settlement should be accepted; and that since the appellant. bank had rejected the claim of the respondent for appointment on compassionate ground and had requested the High Court to decide the question on merits, on the peculiar facts of the case especially when it was not the contention of the appellant bank before the High Court that there were no vacancies available with the bank to absorb the respondents even if they were eligible to be so absorbed, the High Court was right in issuing the mandamus.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Majmudar
Neutral Citation	1998 INSC 42
Petitioner	Indian Bank
Respondent	K. Usha And Anr. Etc. Etc.
SCR	[1998] 1 S.C.R. 358
Judgement Date	1998-01-28
Case Number	3619

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Indian Bank Vs. K. Usha and Anr. Etc. Etc.

Please Log-in to view this content

S, Guin & Others Vs. Grindlays Bank Ltd,

K. Anjaiah Etc. Vs. K. Chandraiah and Ors. Etc.

Dhirendra Chandra Pal Vs. Associated Bank of Tripura Ltd. (in Liquidation)

State Bank of Travancore Vs. Elias Elias & Ors.

Shri Ram Narain Vs. The Simla Banking & Industrial Co. Limited.

Mehsana District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.

Union of India & Anr. Vs. Citi Bank, N. A.

B.o.i. Finance Limited Etc. Vs. The Custodian and Ors. Etc.

A.r. Krishnamurthy & Anr Vs. C.i.t Madras

Indian Bank Vs. K. Usha and Anr. Etc. Etc.

Indian Bank Vs. K. Usha and Anr. Etc. Etc.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

S, Guin & Others Vs. Grindlays Bank Ltd,

K. Anjaiah Etc. Vs. K. Chandraiah and Ors. Etc.

Dhirendra Chandra Pal Vs. Associated Bank of Tripura Ltd. (in Liquidation)

State Bank of Travancore Vs. Elias Elias & Ors.

Shri Ram Narain Vs. The Simla Banking & Industrial Co. Limited.

Mehsana District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.

Union of India & Anr. Vs. Citi Bank, N. A.

B.o.i. Finance Limited Etc. Vs. The Custodian and Ors. Etc.

A.r. Krishnamurthy & Anr Vs. C.i.t Madras

Indian Bank Vs. K. Usha and Anr. Etc. Etc.