High Court rules Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in Guntur has jurisdiction over dispute involving State Bank of Hyderabad employee despite Central Government control.
In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has overturned a decision by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Guntur, concerning its jurisdiction to hear a dispute involving a dismissed employee of the State Bank of Hyderabad. The High Court's decision, delivered by Justice Balaji Medamalli, underscores the importance of territorial jurisdiction in labour disputes, even when the employer is under the control of the Central Government.
The petitioner, Chennupalli Seetha, was employed by the State Bank of Hyderabad as a Sweeper-cum-Lunch Room Attendant. After allegations of securing employment through unethical means surfaced, she was dismissed from service in October 2012. Seetha challenged her dismissal by raising an industrial dispute before the Labour Court in Guntur. However, the Labour Court had previously returned the dispute, asserting that it lacked jurisdiction as the appropriate Government for the respondent bank was the Central Government.
Citing precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in Vijaya Bank v. Shyamal Kumar Lodh, the High Court clarified that the Labour Court within whose territorial limits the establishment is situated has the jurisdiction to adjudicate such disputes. Justice Medamalli emphasized that the dispute arose within the jurisdiction of the Guntur Labour Court, and thus, it was competent to hear the case.
The judgment highlighted that Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act provides an additional remedy to workmen, allowing them to approach the Labour Court directly without a prior reference from the appropriate Government. This provision played a crucial role in the High Court's decision to set aside the Labour Court's earlier order.
The High Court has remanded the case back to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Guntur, for a fresh consideration on merits. This decision ensures that the petitioner's dispute will be adjudicated in the jurisdiction where the employment was based, reinforcing the principle that jurisdiction is determined by the location of the establishment.
The ruling marks a pivotal moment for industrial disputes in Andhra Pradesh, particularly those involving institutions under Central Government control. It reaffirms the Labour Court's role in providing accessible and direct remedies to aggrieved workers, thereby upholding their rights under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Bottom Line :
Industrial Disputes Act - Direct industrial dispute by dismissed workman - Labour Court within whose territorial jurisdiction establishment is situated has jurisdiction to entertain dispute even if employer-Bank is under control of Central Government - Order returning dispute for want of jurisdiction set aside and matter remanded for decision on merits.
Statutory provision(s): Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Sections 2A(2), 10
Chennupalli Seetha v. State Bank of Hyderabad, (Andhra Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2989242
