Case Note & Summary
The case involved appeals by the Canara Bank Limited and the Canara Industrial and Banking Syndicate Limited against orders of the Central Government Labour Court, Delhi, which had allowed applications filed by employees under section 330(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The employees claimed a special allowance of Rs. 15 per month, asserting they were cashiers in charge of cash at their respective branches, as per para 164(b)(7) of the Sastry Award. The bank contended that the applications were not maintainable, that the Labour Court lacked jurisdiction, and that the employees were merely routine clerks without entitlement to the allowance. The Labour Court found that the employees were indeed performing the duties of cashiers in charge, handling both receiving and paying transactions, and were solely responsible for the cash in the single lock box. The Supreme Court upheld the Labour Court's decision, affirming that the applications were maintainable and that the Sastry Award applied to branches, not just pay offices. The court clarified that the employees' responsibilities were greater than those of routine clerks, thus entitling them to the special allowance. The appeals were dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Industrial Disputes - Maintainability of Applications - Applications under section 330(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are maintainable - The court held that the Labour Court had jurisdiction to decide the applications filed by employees claiming special allowance as cashiers in charge of cash. The court found that the provisions of the Sastry Award applied to bank branches as well (Paras 1-2). B) Industrial Disputes - Special Allowance - Employees entitled to special allowance under para 164(b)(7) of the Sastry Award - The court determined that the employees were cashiers in charge of cash at their respective branches and thus entitled to the special allowance, as their duties were of a higher nature than those of routine clerks (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether applications under section 330(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were maintainable and whether the Labour Court had jurisdiction to decide the claims for special allowance.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the Labour Court's decision that the applications were maintainable and that the employees were entitled to the special allowance as cashiers in charge of cash.
Law Points
- Maintainability of applications
- Jurisdiction of Labour Court
- Special allowance entitlement
- Interpretation of Sastry Award
- Definition of cashiers in charge
