fol lowing the decisions in State Bank of India vs N. Sundara Money, (supra); Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Orissa, (supra); Santosh Gupta vs State Bank of Patiala, (supra); Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. vs Workmen, [ ; Mohan Lal vs Management of M/s. Bharat Electronics Ltd., ; and Surendra Kumar Verma vs Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, New Delhi, ; , held that in the above series of cases that have come later, the Constitution Bench deci sion in Hariprasad (supra) has been examined and the ratio indicated therein has been confined to its own facts and the view indicated by the Court in that case did not meet with the approval of Parliament and, therefore, the law had been subsequently amended.