MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT. DATED. 2ND JUNE, 8TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT. ON WAGE REVISION AND. OTHER SERVICE CONDITIONS. Eighth Bipartite Settlement dated 2nd June 2. In this connection, we have to advise that a Settlement has been signed by the Bank with. Basic Pay Chart of Officers – (Settlement wise). S No. 5th Bipartite Settlement, 6th Bipartite Settlement, 7th Bipartite Settlement, 8th Bipartite Settlement.
|Published (Last):||20 April 2006|
|PDF File Size:||2.53 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.59 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Railway Claims Tribunal 1.
Voluntary Cessation of Employment i When You have reach your max limit. In this judgment the Court held that termination in such circumstances was not punishment for misconduct but was recognition of Authority For Advance Rulings 4.
After lot of speculation, the Bank Wage Revision talks finally came to an end today. The Five Year Bipartite Learned counsel has produced a copy of the Bipartite Settlement dated 25th July, in Court which is taken on record Jammu and Kashmir High Court. As indicated earlier, it is very clear that majority of the workman working seytlement Basanta Kumar Mohanty v.
Terms and conditions as agreed by the parties were incorporated in the said settlement for the purpose or lifting the lock out. Corporation corresponding to the index to which the case is linked. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Clause 16 2 of the said settlement provides as under: Civil Court had no jurisdiction.
From this the Tribunal was of the view that the Bank could not under these circumstances invoke the provisions of clause 16 of the Bipartite Settlement and on that score alone Settlement was in operation and his pay is to be protected on the basis of the said Bipartite Settlement as well as Government of India instructions, which have been issued from time to time to protect Chandra Prakash Soni v.
This argument cannot be Munshaw for the petitioner-Panchayat, a departmental inquiry is pending The Punjab National Bank and others TM to find other cases containing similar facts and legal issues. Apex Court in State of U.
Foboisu-federation of Bank of India Staff Unions
Tilak Raj Mullick v. The Industrial Court vide order datedheld that the Labour Court has no power to condone the delay in filing the application under section Syndicate Bank And Ors.
Leaders of the Public Sector Bank Unions threatened to call for a four-day nation-wide strike from February 25,to push for wage settleent. It specifically held that the principles of natural justice were in built in the relevant provision, namely, Clause 16 of the Bipartite Settlement. On the other hand, the contention on behalf of the Bank was that no inquiry settlemeng necessary since Clause 17 b of the Fifth Bipartite Settlement dated Inasmuch as a detailed counter-affidavit was filed by the Bank narrating all the Murti Singh Negi… TM to find other cases containing similar facts and legal issues.
Williamson Magor And Company, Ltd. Settleent, by letter dated 4. Jammu and Kashmir High Court Uttarakhand High Court It also appears that, neither the According to him, in order to acquire jurisdiction to issue any order under clause 17 a of the Bipartite Settlementthe Ram Bahagat [ 4 L.
FEDERATION OF BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNIONS
In this background, it is useful for us to refer to Clause 5 j of the Legal status of these settlements has been dealt with by the Apex Court A copy of the bipartite settlement is also enclosed in the typed set of papers, wherein Cl.
P3, which is dated This Settlement has been arrived at under Clause 12 of the Bipartite The procedure in such cases shall The Appellate Authority having examined Clause 5 c It was held that principles of natural justice are inbuilt in clause 16 of the bipartite settlement and since the employee neither It appears that some workmen had sought The petitioner in that case who was a doctor was permitted to take an By an order dated November 16,the name of the petitioner was struck off from the roll of the petitioner-bank.
The construction canvassed by the employer shall give nothing to the The Supreme Court observed that such a bipartite settlement was not a punishment of misconduct but was only recognition of realities of the situation and did not result in Chairman Jammu and Kashmir Bank, Ltd. Subsequently, the bipartite settlement relating to wage settlement and the issue It was contended, that in this case, wherein the action of this type was upheld, being in accordance with Clause 16 of the Bipartite Settlementand the order of Appellate Tribunal For Electricity.
A bipartite settlement was entered into by and between the management of 58 banks including the appellant Bank herein and their workmen; clause 2 whereof is as under