BANK OF. INDIA versus SECRETARY, BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION AND ANR .

Citation: [2001] 2 S.C.R. 1029 · Decided: 09-04-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

BANK OF. INDIA 
A 
v. 
SECRETARY, BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION AND ANR . 
. 
' 
APRIL 9, 2001 
[S. RAJENDRABABU AND SlllVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.] 
B 
Labour Laws : 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947-Industrial Dispute-Workmen working in 
Collection Centres and Clearing Houses on behalf of Appellant-Bank-Entitle-
c 
ment to Special Assistant Allowance-Held, no findings relating to duties 
discharged by workmen determined by Tribunal-Matter remitted back to 
Tribunal. 
Workmen represented by Union work at various centres including 
Collection Centres situated in different cities. There was a dispute regard-
D 
ing special assistant allowance in the category of Special Assistant and it 
was referred to Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the workmen 
arc entitled to the allowance for the number of days they have worked at 
various collection centres and the same is payable "ith effect from the 
date of reference. 
E 
The appellant-Bank contended that the duties performed by the 
workmen does not require great skill and responsibility for entitlement of 
-
special allowance; that the duties of workmen are clerical duties which are 
different from that of Special Assistant, which are Iiad down in Bi-partite 
Settlement, modified from time to time; that the Special Assistant "111 be 
accountable and responsible for running of the department under them; 
F 
and that the workmen deputed to clearing house are not in charge to 
Bank's clearing department. 
-
The workmen contended that they performed duties as authorised 
representatives of the appellant at clearing houses of Reserve Bank and 
G 
State Bank of India; and that they perform all regular bank duties relating 
~ 
to the appellant-Bank. 
I 
Allomng the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. The duties discharged by the workmen, who are clear-
H 
1029 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
1030 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 2 S.C.R. 
ing house representatives of the appellant-Bank are in serious dispute. 
Unless the same are adjudicated by appropriate examination of the facts of 
the case with reference to the contentions advanced by either party and the 
evidence adduced, it cannot be concluded in the manner done by the 
Tribunal. There is no finding that the workmen discharge certain duties 
and, therefore, are entitled to special allowance in the category of Special 
Assistant. (1035-C] 
1.2. The Tribunal has proceeded as if it was dealing with a fresh 
matter before it without reference either to the Bi-partite Settlel)lent or to 
the Sastry or the Desai Award. Necessarily, the Tribunal had to examine 
whether the workmen in question fall in any one of the categories to which 
special allowance is to be given or refused by the two Awards or in the 
Bi-partite Settlement that part has been modified or a new clause has been 
introduced thereto inconsistent with the Sastry/Desai Award. Unless such 
an exercise is undertaken and the details of the duties assigned to each of 
the workmen are considered, it will not be possible for the Tribunal to 
decide a matter of this nature. [1035-D-E] 
1.3. The award made by the Tribunal is, therefore, set aside and 
remitted back for fresh consideration in the light of the above observatiC1ns 
and in accordance with the law. (1035-F] 
Central Bank of India Ltd. v. Sisir Kuamr Shaw, (1976] 2 SCC 859, 
referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8569 of 1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.7.97 of the Central Government 
Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur in Industrial 
Dispute No. 232 of 1989. 
G.B. Pai and Ms. Meera Mathur for Mis. JBD & Co. for the Appellant. 
P.N. Gupta for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RAJENDRA BABU, J. This appeal is filed against au award made by 
the Industrial Tribunal, Kanpur on a reference made to it on the following 
question: 
. 
-I 
-
~ 
~ 
' 
• 
BANK OF INDIA v. SECY. BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION [RA!ENDRA BABU,!.) 
103 J 
"Whether the action of the management of Bank of India in not 
A 
paying special allowance to the staff posted at clearing house of 
Lucknow, Agra, Unnao, Varanasi and Kanpur as per list enclosed is 
justified? If not to what relief were the workmen entitled?" 
The Tribunal held that the concerned workmen are entitled for special 
assistant allowance for the number of days they have worked at various 
collection centres and the same shall be payable for the number of days they 
have actually worked with effect from the date of refe

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.