Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellant.
(2.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
(3.) On 1.9.1987 employees of Regional Rural Banks (in short the RRBs) filed Writ Petition Nos. 7149-50 of 1982 and Writ Petition No. 132 of 1984 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the Constitution) challenging salary structure in these Banks. This court directed the issues to be referred to a National Industrial Tribunal (in short the National Tribunal). On 26.11.1987 the National Tribunal was constituted by the Government of India to consider the disputes relating to pay, salary and allowances payable to the employees of RRBs. On 10.4.1989 "Industry Level Fifth Bipartite Settlement" was signed between 54 Banks and their associations, wherein inter alia agreed that special allowances for clerical staff would be payable to the employees of 54 (sponsor) Banks, and "Cashier in charge of cash" would be entitled to special allowance of Rs.189 per month. On 9.6.1989 an agreement was entered into between the State Bank of India and its Federation, called the "Fifth Bipartite Settlement" wherein revised functional allowance for workmen was agreed to be paid and each "cashier in charge of cash" was to be paid allowance of Rs. 380/- per month. On 30.4.1990 the National Tribunal passed an award directing that the officers and employees of the RRBs will be entitled to claim parity with their counterparts in the sponsor bank in the matter of pay scale with effect from 1.9.1987. On 16.1.1991 Government of India constituted an Equation Committee pursuant to the observations made in the Award wherein it was provided that "allowances and benefits" which are provided in the Bipartite settlement of the concerned sponsored bank may be extended to the RRBs employees. On 22.2.1991 Government of India issued instructions to all sponsor banks and RRBs for implementing NIT award and recommendation of the Pay Equation Committee. On 31.7.1991, arose the starting point of controversy so far as the present dispute is concerned. According to the appellants, on an erroneous reading of the award and without appreciating the fact that there is no post of "Joint Custodian of Keys" in the sponsor bank i.e. State Bank of India, the RRBs. issued a circular stating that "Joint Custodian of Keys (junior/senior clerk )will be eligible for a cash allowance of Rs. 380/- per month. This was issued by the appellant No. 2. Another RRB i.e. Nagarjuna Gramin Bank on 8.8.1991 which is also sponsored by appellant No. 1 (SBI) issued a circular stating that there is no comparable post of clerk or cashier holding keys as Joint Custodian in SBI and as per Government of India and as per Government of Indias instructions, "cashier in charge" holding keys will be entitled to allowance of Rs.189/- per month and not Rs. 380/- per month. The appellant No. 2 RRB also issued similar circular clarifying that Joint Custodian allowance shall be paid at the rate of Rs.189/- (as per Industry Level Settlement) instead of Rs. 380/- per month. The respondent-Union filed writ petition before the High Court. That writ petition No. 23469 of 1991 was filed praying for quashing circular dated 21.10.1991 issued by the appellant No. 2 on the ground that Fifth Bipartite Settlement entered between SBI and Staff Federation provided that said allowance was to be paid at the rate of Rs. 380/- per month as cash allowance and joint custodian allowance is payable to the employees of sponsor bank and there should be parity of allowance of the employees of RRB as per the National Tribunal Award. By judgment dated 27.1.1992 the Patna High Court which was dealing with similar issues granted liberty to Government and RRB to reduce the said allowance. On 21.4.1992 NABARD issued a Circular to all sponsor banks including SBI stating that of RRBs special allowance of only Rs.189/- shall be payable. This order of NABARD was issued with the prior approval of the Government of India. The writ petition filed by respondent was allowed by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court. Challenge was raised by the employees of another RRB i.e. Nagarjuna Gramin Bank which was also sponsored by SBI before Andhra Pradesh High Court. A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that employees are entitled to allowance at the rate of Rs.189/- and not at the rate of Rs. 380/- per month. The order of learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court was challenged before the Division Bench in Writ Appeal which as noted above was dismissed.;