Satish Kumar Chabra vs State Bank of India

K. Kannan, J.—This application is to review the judgment which was passed by this Court on 10.02.2010 by the terms of which the denial of back wages during the period of suspension was quashed. The order had been passed in the absence of any representation on behalf of the Bank. In the course of the order in paragraph 4, it had been stated, unless there is a specific rule enabling upon (sic) punishing authority to withdraw the benefit of full back wages during the period of suspension, when ultimately the punishment that was imposed was merely warning and censure, there is no escape from the conclusion that the impugned order withdrawing to the Petitioner full back wages except the subsistence allowance already withdrawn, would not be sustained. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant brings to my attention para 521 (10) (b) of the Sastri Award that lays down as follows:

Pending such enquiry he may be suspended, but if on the conclusion of the enquiry it is decided to take no action against him he shall be deemed to be have been on duty and shall be entitled to full back wages and allowances and to all other privileges for the period of suspension, and if some punishment other than dismissal is inflicted, the whole or part of the period of suspension, may at the discretion of Management, be treated as on duty with the right of corresponding portion of the wages, allowance etc.

(emphasis supplied).

This award, which is the result of bipartite talks between the management and the workman definitely spells out that if some punishment other than dismissal is inflicted, the management will have a discretion to treat the period of suspension as on duty with the right of correspondence wages or allowances etc. In the manner in which the terms of the award are spelt out, it requires a specific order to treat the period of suspension as on duty to entitle workman to claim himself to be entitled to wages. If on the other hand, by a specific order, the wages are not ordered or if it is stated that the period of suspension shall not be taken to be as on duty, it cannot be stated that it was without such power. The order came to be, therefore, passed without reference to a binding award between the management and the workman of whom the writ Petitioner is a member. It falls within the category of case that would require a judicial review and I, therefore, allow the review application and hold that the withdrawal of any benefit during the period of suspension was in conformity with the rights governing the parties and the writ petition challenging the order was, therefore, liable to be dismissed.

The review application is allowed on the above terms.