: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5229 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO.5229 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO.5229 OF 2004 State Bank of India ... Petitioner V/s. Smt.Rajashree S. Nakhate ... Respondent Mr.H.Bhave with Ms.Manisha Pant i/b Bhave & Co. for Petitioner Mrs.Meena H. Doshi for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: AUGUST 10, 2004 AUGUST 10, 2004 AUGUST 10, 2004 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The order of the Labour Court which is challenged herein has been passed under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Petitioner-bank had deducted an amount of Rs.4,000/- from the respondent-workman’s account claiming that she was responsible for shortage of Rs.100 currency notes which she had certified. The Labour Court has held that there is no reason why the bank did not give any opportunity to the respondent-workman before deducting this amount from her account. The Labour Court has also found that the bank had sought to recover an amount of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.4,000/- from her account on 25.11.1998 and 25.6.1999. These amounts which were deducted were paid back to the respondent. The bank then on a third : 2 : occasion sought to deduct an amount of Rs.4000/-. The Labour Court has found that deductions made from the respondent’s account without assigning any reason or holding any enquiry cannot be countenanced. 2. The Labour Court, in my view, has rightly allowed the application of the Respondent-workman. I see no reason to differ from the findings of the Labour Court. Petition rejected. 3. Parties be provided an authenticated copy of this order.