Bank Of Baroda, v. The Deputy General Secretary,

2026:MHC:927

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER and C.M.P.No.5734 of 2026 Bank of Baroda Represented by its Regional Manager Chennai Regional Office - Chennai Metro I 10, C.P.Ramasamy Road 2nd Floor, Alwarpet Chennai-600 180.

... Appellant vs.

1.

The Deputy General Secretary Vijaya Bank Workers' Organization No.60/2, Big Street Triplicane Chennai-600 002.

2.

The Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court Government of India Ministry of Labour & Employment I Floor, 'B' Wing, No.26, Haddows Road Shastri Bhavan, Chennai-600 006.

... Respondents Page Nos.1/4

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 12.11.2024 (corrected on 07.01.2025) in W.P.No.43735 of 2006 on the file of the Hon'ble High Court, Madras and allow the present writ appeal.

For Appellant :

Ms.Taskeen .J for Ms.Revathi .M For Respondents :

Mr.K.M.Ramesh Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Subramani, for R1 R2 - Tribunal *****

J U D G M E N T

The present intra-Court appeal has been instituted under Clause 15 of Letters Patent assailing the writ order dated 12.11.2024 passed in W.P.No.43735 of 2006.

2. A dispute raised by the Employees' Union on behalf of the workman, V.Panneerselvam, challenging the order of punishment of stoppage of increment for two years with cumulative effect. The Labour Court passed an award in favour of the first respondent in I.D.No.41 of 2005 dated 21.02.2006.

3. The appellant - Bank of Baroda preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.43735 of 2006, challenging the said award. The learned single Judge found that, on account of huge efflux of time and considering the fact that the punishment of stoppage of increment for two years was effected Page Nos.2/4

long back and that all terminal and retiremental benefits had already been settled in favour of the workman, it would be unnecessary for the writ Court to go into the merits of the matter.

4. The writ Court found that remanding the matter after this length of time would not result in any useful consequence, since the benefits had already been settled in favour of the workman by the appellant Bank.

5. This Court is in agreement with the findings of the writ Court and is not inclined to entertain the writ appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 03-03-2026 Index : Yes Speaking / Non-speaking mk Page Nos.3/4

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J., and K. SURENDER, J., mk 03.03.2026 Page Nos.4/4