KSHETRIYA KISAN GRAMIN BANK versus D.B. SHARMA AND ORS.

Citation: [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 638 · Decided: 15-11-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
KSHETRIYA KISAN GRAMIN BANK 
v. 
D.B. SHARMA AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 15, 2000 
B 
[G.B. PATTANAIK, U.C. BANERJEE ANON. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976-Sections 3, 6(2) & 17-Parity of 
C pay-Equation-Employees of Regional Rural Banks seeking parity with 
counterparts of nationalised or commercial banks-Equation Committee 
recommending equation with counterparts of respective Sponsor Banks-All 
Regional Rural Banks except Appellant Bank Sponsored by nationalised or 
commercial banks-Appellant bank sponsored by V.P. Co-operative Bank 
D Ltd-Equation challenged by employees of appellant bank-Held, equation 
in consonance with second proviso to Section 17(1)-Concept of 'equal pay 
for equal work' and 'claim of parity with others' different-Principle of 'equal 
pay for equal work' not applied-Discrimination alleged-Whether equation 
unconstitutional-Classification-Even Single institution can form class by 
itself-Sponsor Bank plays vital role in establishment of Rural Banks-
E Classification on basis of Sponsor Bank valid-Held, equation not 
unconstitutional-Constitution of India, 1950-Article I 4. 
Constitution of India-Article 226-Interference-Scope of-Equation 
Committee constitutedJor equation of pay-Committee an Expert Body 
F consisting of specialised personnel-Decision and conclusion of committee 
challenged-No a/legation of malice or extraneous consideration-High 
Court tinkering with decision and conclusion of Committee-Whether 
proper-Held, not proper. 
Appellant is Regional Rural Bank established under Regional Rural 
G Banks Act, 1976 and sponsored by Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Bank Limited. 
Upon Writ Petition being filed by employees of Regional Rural Banks seeking 
parity in respect of pay, salary, allowances and other benefits with employees 
of Nationalised Banks in corresponding or comparable posts, Central 
Government referred said disputes to Industrial Tribunal. Tribunal held that 
H officers and employees of Regional Rural Banks were entitled to claim parity 
638 
-
KSHETRIYA KISAN GRAM IN BANK v. D.B. SHARMA 
639 
with officers and other employees of sponsor banks and held that equation of A 
posts and consequent fixation of new scales of pay, etc. should be decided by 
Central Government. Thereafter, Central Government constituted an Equation 
Committee and referred award to it which recommended equation of officers 
-
"-
and employees of Regional Rural Banks with the counterparts of their sponsor 
banks. Pursuant to said recommendations, Union Government issued B 
notification under Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act 
equating Branch Managers' post and pay of appellant bank with post and pay 
of Assistant Manager ofU.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. 
Officers of Appellant Bank filed writ petition challenging the said 
notification which was allowed by the High Court on the ground that Tribunal C 
had accepted claim of employees of Appellant Bank that they are entitled to 
pay scales which are given to employees of Commercial Banks; that nature 
of job performed by officers of appellant bank and other Regional Rural Banks 
sponsored by commercial or nationalised banks is similar; and that distinction 
made by Equation Committee is in violation of the principle ' equal pay for 
equal work'. High Court directed Central Government not to make any D 
distinction between officers and employees of appellant bank and other 
Gramin Banks and further directed that Assistant Branch Managers of 
Appellant Bank Should get same scale of pay as Assistant Managers of other 
Gramin Banks sponsored by Nationalised Banks. Aggrieved by the judgment 
of High Court, Appellant Bank has filed the present appeal. 
E 
Appellant-Bank contended that Tribunal had specifically negatived 
applicability of plea of equal pay for equal work and had applied principle of 
1 
parity; that pay structure of sponsor bank was the relevant guiding factor in 
determining pay structure of employees of Gramin Bank in view of Second 
proviso to sub-section (I) of Section 17 which was taken into consideration F 
by Tribunal while making its recommendation but ignored by the High Court 
and since appellant bank was not sponsored by Nationalised or Commercial 
bank, its employees cannot be equated with employees of other Regional Rural 
Banks sponsored by Nationalised banks; that appellant bank constituted a 
class by itself and having regard to sponsorsbip, such classification was G 
.. permissible a

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