- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 13th August, 1991, allowing the claim of the writ petitioners. The facts leading to the disposal of this appeal are given as under:
(2.) The writ petitioners were working as messengers with the appellant-Bank after their appointment in September, 1987 and on account of the fact that they had been continuing service without any break since that day had also been confirmed as such. The writ petitioners thereafter approached this Court by way of C.W.P. No. 10698 of 1989 out of which the present appeal arises alleging that some of the messengers employed by the appellant-bank were being paid the pay scale of Rs, 750-950 while the writ petitioners and many others were being paid half this pay on the pretext that they were working only as part-time messengers and were, therefore, not entitled to receive the salary of full time messengers. It was further the case of the writ petitioners that although they were dubbed as part time messengers yet they were called upon to perform their duties in the same manner as regular messengers and were, therefore, entitled to be paid the regular pay scale of Rs. 750-950 on the principle of equal pay for equal work'. The appellant which was the respondent in the writ petition contested the claim of the writ petitioners and averred that as they were only part time messengers they could not be equated with the regular full time messengers so as to drew equal wages with the latter. It was further stated that in case the writ petitioners felt aggrieved the proper remedy was to seek a reference under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. It was further alleged that same part time messengers working in different branches of the appellant-Bank in various parts Of the country had filed writ petitions in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution and, upon an objection being raised that the matter ought to be decided under the Industrial Disputes Act, the Supreme Court had directed the Central Government to appoint a National Industrial Tribunal to examine the various claims raised by the employees of the appellant-bank throughout the country, including such as the one raised in the present writ petition. The Central Government accordingly constituted the National Industrial Tribunal and referred, inter alia, the following disput. for its adjudication: "Dispute relating to pay, salary, other allowances and other benefits to the employees of the Regional Rural Banks in terms of the pleadings of the parties in the writ petitions Civil No. 7149-50 of 1982 and No. 132 of 1984 filed in the Supreme Court of India." At the time of filing of the written statement in reply to the writ petition in the present case the stand of the respondent-Bank was that the matter was still pending before the National Industrial Tribunal and, as such, the writ petition was not maintainable. During the pendency of the writ petition, however, the National Industrial Tribunal vide its award dated 30th April, 1992 decided the matter in issue and in the case of part-time messengers, the Tribunal in paragraph 4.428 of the award granted the following relief: "In view of the authoritative pronouncements of the Surpeme Court, it must be held that the part time sweepers-cum-messengers who were employed on daily wages or on half of the salary of on some other proportion of the salary of a regular messenger, will be entitled to their various claims such as equal pay and all other attendant benefits as are admissible to regularly appointed full time messengers in the respective RRBS. That there was/is no sanctioned post of a regular messenger in a branch or the head office is absolutely irrelevant and immaterial in view of the proved facts that the so called part time messengers whether on daily wages or on some other basis, were made to work full time by their respective managements. The managements cannot extract full time work and even beyond the working hours from the so called part time messengers by merely showing them in the acquittance rolls as part time employees paid or on either daily wages; or some other basis; or on some proportionate basis. Their services shall be regularised with effect from the date of their continuous enagement. If deemed necessary it will be open to the government or the RRBS as the case may be, to sanction the required number of posts to accommodate the writ petitions and all those belonging to their class." The learned Single Judge hearing the writ petition relying on the award of the National Tribunal granted relief to the writ petitioners in identical terms. Aggrieved by, the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the present appeal has been preferred at the instance of the respondents in the writ petition i.e. the Bank.
(3.) Mr. Arun Jain, learned counsel for the appellant Bank, has urged that the award of the National Industrial Tribunal was not binding on the parties in the present proceedings inasmuch as it was the admitted case before the National Tribunal that the so-called part time messengers were in fact doing full time jobs and were, therefore, entitled to receive wages as regular full time messengers. He has urged on this basis that it was keeping in view the award of the National Industrial Tribunal that the Ministry of Finance had issued Annexure PA dated February 22, 1991, in which it had been directed that in respect of the part time employees, the Chairman of the Bank should consider each case on merits and decide whether such employees performed part time or full times work m the bank and fix their fitment accordingly. It has been urged that this directive issued under proviso(l) of Section 17 of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (short Act') was binding on the parties and power had been given to the Chairman to determine no facts in the case of each individual employee as to the nature and duration of his employment.;