Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Standard Chartered Bank Vs. Asst. Labour Commissioner (Central) and ors.

Standard Chartered Bank vs Asst. Labour Commissioner (Central) and ors.

Disposition Petition allowed Court Kolkata Decided Dec 05, 1991
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/874635

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Case No. 971/1990
Subject
Labour and Industrial
Disposition
Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Labour and Industrial
Outcome / disposition
Petition allowed
Acts & sections
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 12

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Standard Chartered Bank

Respondent

Asst. Labour Commissioner (Central) and ors.

Legal References

Acts
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 12
Reported In
(1992)2CALLT223(HC),[1992(65)FLR769],(1994)IILLJ792Cal

Excerpt

- .....the bank. nothing has been produced; on the contrary, it transpires from the materials on record that the respondent workman obtained the employment from the employee of the bank in his personal capacity and he signed his letter of appointment accordingly. in the affidavit filed before this court nothing has been stated that he received appointment by signing a letter which shows inter alia that he was the personal driver of the bank's employee. in view of all these aspects, this court is of the view that there is no industrial dispute and the respondent no. l cannot, initiate any conciliation proceedings within the scope of industrial disputes act since there is lack of jurisdiction. it would appear as an abuse of process of law to permit the conciliation proceedings to continue. accordingly, this court finds sufficient merit in the win petition by quashing the conciliation proceeding and by setting aside the impugned order, copy of which is annexure 'c' to the writ petition. let an appropriate writ be issued accordingly. there will be no order as to costs.2. all parties concerned to act on the signed copy of the operative part of this judgment on the usual undertaking.

Full Judgment

Susanta Chatterjee, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Standard Chartered Bank challenging the order dated April 3, 1990, made by the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), the respondent No. 1 and the copy thereof is Annexure 'C' to the writ petition and for other consequential reliefs on the grounds that the impugned order deciding to initiate conciliation proceeding is bad in law since there is no relationship of employer and employee and there does not exist any industrial dispute authorising the respondent No. l to initiate any conciliation proceedings. It is stated in detail that the petitioner happens to be a personal driver of an Executive of the bank. At no material point of time the petitioner was appointed by the bank and there cannot be any conciliation proceeding on the issue of dismissal of the same by his employer. Admittedly, there is neither any letter of appointment nor a letter of termination. This Court had given specific opportunities to the respondent employee to satisfy this Court as to whether there is anything on record to show that the petitioner was employed by the Bank. Nothing has been produced; on the contrary, it transpires from the materials on record that the respondent workman obtained the employment from the employee of the bank in his personal capacity and he signed his letter of appointment accordingly. In the affidavit filed before this Court nothing has been stated that he received appointment by signing a letter which shows inter alia that he was the personal driver of the bank's employee. In view of all these aspects, this Court is of the view that there is no industrial dispute and the respondent No. l cannot, initiate any conciliation proceedings within the scope of Industrial Disputes Act since there is lack of jurisdiction. It would appear as an abuse of process of law to permit the conciliation proceedings to continue. Accordingly, this Court finds sufficient merit in the win petition by quashing the conciliation proceeding and by setting aside the impugned order, copy of which is Annexure 'C' to the writ petition. Let an appropriate writ be issued accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.

2. All parties concerned to act on the signed copy of the operative part of this judgment on the usual undertaking.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial