Tuesday, 5 June 2007

Phoenix [3] ...contd

Third in sequence, this one is a running narrative with reference to activities of SBISA/ AISBISF, the operating trade union organisations in State Bank of India.
Text Link Ads
CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEETING -SBISA:
----------------------------------------------
Central Committe, a top forum of SBISA, in its meeting held at Brindaban on the 19th November’94, took several important decisions on crucial matters including supercession of Circle Committee in Delhi Circle replacing it by an Ad-hoc Committee and my election as an Honorary member with effect from 1st February’95 (my date of retirement from active service of the Bank being 31st January’95). The Ad-hoc Committee so appointed consisted of 78 members with S/s. PP Trikha and VK Gupta as Convenor and Joint Convenor respectively. Not happy with the definite decisions so taken, a splinter group within SBISA itself operating at Calcutta chose to go to Calcutta High Court against the Central Committee -so strange and peculiar an instance of a Circle Unit of SBISA working against its apex, the Central Committee. It was Shyamal Kumar Sen Vs State Bank of India Staff Association. Shyamal Kumar Sen being the Circle President of SBISA,Calcutta Circle. After prolonged hearings, their case was rejected outright by the Hon’ble High Court fully upholding not only the decisions of the Central Committee but also the relative areas emerging out of the decisions taken by the General Council of SBISA in their Conference held at Kanpur on the 16th October’94. To recall with a view to cursorily have a glance over the proceedings, an extract from the Chief Secretary’s Circular dated 14th August’95 is reproduced:
“........Meeting of 19th November’94 at Brindaban was a well attended Central Committee despite a campaign launched against it by some of the office bearers in certain circles. Suffer as they did from a severe disgust on failure of their ill designed move to torpedo the legitimate functioning of this Organisation, some of these very office bearers, a limited few so far as the overall strength of the Central Committee is concerned, unduly aspired to see that ultimately their “say” is to materialise as against the will of the representatives in general who took conscious decisions after threadbare deliberations on different items on agenda at the level of the Central/Central Working Committee. One way to satisfy the element of hostility was to compromise the decisions of full Central Committee against the whims and fancies of certain individuals which could have just shattered the very fabric of democratic system in the Organisation. These very elements are the same who did not hesitate to bargain the autonomy of a giant organisation like SBISA in pursuit of their selfish goal going to the extent of inviting intruders to pollute its sanctity..........”
The Conference of SBISA held at Kanpur on the 16th October’1994 was a land mark in itself and it took several crucial decisions.When disputed by an individual or two with an adverse agenda in their mind, the Hon’ble High Court at Kolkata upheld all the decisions of the Central Committee in toto and this in itself was a historical factor. Deliberations during trial of the case in the Court and off the scene make an interesting reading in many ways. The petitioners who filed the writ against the Central Committee of SBISA quite succeeded in prejudicing the Court against me through their leading advocates to the extent that the Judge openly used to talk ill of me when addressing my advocates with a definite message to ridicule me. One such remark was “Look, your client is a big bully and too powerful a person, has got guts to disregard this Court. Your client had the audacity to tear the order of this Court to pieces. Infact this is how the lawyers from the opposite side repeatedly projected my image in the Court with cock and bull stories to manage necessary bias against me. On one such occasion I felt like giving an immediate reaction to such remarks arguing the position myself knowing fully well that it was to incur the wrath of the Court resulting into contempt proceedings against me but I saw a feeling of fear writ large on the faces of my lawyers who virtually corckedup my mouth with their palms in full view of the Justice himself. My lawers assured me to apprise the Court of the correct picture in the matter as against a most distorted version of it given by the opposite side. Reconciling, I stopped continuing after a few words.Next hearing onwards it was altogether a reversed scenario….. (to be continued)
Post a Comment

addy-2