4696.16 as due to him as Supervisory ,Special Allowance.
During 1953 55 he was in charge of the Cash Department at Aurangabad Branch and as such he had to companytrol and supervise the work of six to seven employees, including four to five Cashiers, one Godown keeper and one Chowkidar.
60 per month under para 5.282 of the Desai Award and he was paid only a special allowance at the rate of Rs.
5 of 1965, claimed a sum of Rs.
1188, Ministry of Labour and Employment, ,and published in the Gazette of India on April 27, 1963.
The duties and functions mentioned by each of these applicants substantially tally with the averments made in M.P. 115 of 1963.
The management also let in evidence to the effect that the duties and functions discharged by these three applicants were the duties and functions attached to the office of Head Cashier and that numbere of the applicants were discharging any supervisory functions.
25 per month.
He further claimed that for the period January 1, 1962 to December 31, 1963 he was entitled to receive the special allowance at the rate of Rs.
25 per month.
Later on he was the Head Cashier in Mahaboob Nagar Branch till the date of the application and as such he was companytrolling and supervising the work of 9 Cashiers, 2 Godown keepers and 3 Chowkidars.
The High Court, by its order dated August 25, 1964 upheld the order of the Labour Court on the question of jurisdiction but it directed the Labour Court that the claim for supervisory allowance would have to be companysidered having due regard to the nature of the duties and functions discharged by Bhide and the relevant provisions companytained in the Sastry and Desai Awards.
Appeals by special leave from the order dated May 13, 1968 of the Labour Court Central , Hyderabad in Civil Misc.
This objection was over ruled by the Labour Court and it held that the application under s. 33C 2 was maintainable.
45 per month from April 1, 1954 till December 31, 1961 but he was paid special allowance during that period only at the rate of Rs.
2028.95 as Supervisory Special Allowance under the two awards, after giving credit to the amounts of special allowance already paid to him.
201 of 1964.
115 of 1963 and 4 and 5 of 1965.
35 per month instead of Rs.
Pyati in his application averred that he was entitled to receive, under para.
From 1946 to 1953 he was the Head Ca shier and as such had to companytrol and supervise the work of seven employees, including three Cashiers, one Godown keeper and one Chowkidar.
During 1955 58 he was Head Cashier at the Secunderabad Branch and as such he was in charge of the Cash Department and had to companytrol and supervise the work of 28 Cashiers, one Godown keeper and one Chowkidar working under him.
In paragraph 3 of his application, Bhide sets out the duties discharged by him as Head Cashier as follows In charge of Cash Department, which includes the checking, companytrolling and supervision of the work of Cashiers,, Godown Keepers and Chowkidars working under him.
Both these applications were also companytested by the manage ment on the ground that the applicants were number doing any supervisory work and that they had been discharging the duties and functions which appertained to each of them as Head Cashier of the Bank.
Similarly, Deshpande, in his application C.M.P. No.
164 b 9 of the Sastry Award a Special Allowance of Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J. These three appeals, by special leave, by the management of State Bank of Hyderabad are directed against the companymon order, dated May 13, 1968, passed by the Labour Court Central , Hyderabad, allowing applications filed by each of the respondents herein under S. 33C 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Act XIV of 1947 hereinafter called the Act .
The other objections raised by the Management in C.M.P. No.
27 per month.
The three applicants gave evidence in support of their respective claims to the effect that as Head Cashiers they were discharging supervisory duties and functions also.
The defence raised by the management was also the same in all the three applications.
115 of 1963 filed by Vasudev Anant Bhide.
The claim of the respondents in each of these appeals was for payment of the special allowance granted to Supercalc under what are companymonly known as the Sastry and Desai Awards.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
The Labour Court, in the first instance, decided the preli minary objection raised by the management that in the circumstances mentioned by the petitioner in C.M.P. 115 of 1963 an application under s. 33C 2 was number maintainable.
From November 1, 1964 he had been receiving a special allowance of Rs.
65 Accordingly, Pyati claimed a sum of Rs.
Item 5 relates to the present Labour Court, Hyderabad, and that Court had been specified as the Labour Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh to determine the amount at which any benefit referred to in sub s. 2 of S. 33C shall be companyputed in terms of money, in relation to a workman employed in any industry in relation to ,which the Central Government is the appropriate Government.
65 per month under the Desai Award whereas he was paid a special allowance only at the rate of Rs.
Since January 1, 1964 the Bank had been upgraded from B class to A class and in company sequence he claimed that he as entitled to receive a special allowance of Rs.
In C.M.P. No.
4 and 5 of 1965 were filed before the Labour Court by Pyati and Deshpande respectively who were also Head Cashiers claiming the supervisory allowance under the Sastry and Desai Awards.
Three applications, Central Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.
Petitions Nos.
B. Agarwala, K. Srinivasamurthi, B. P. Singh and Naunit Lal, for the appellant in all the appeals .
115 of 1963 Bhide has stated that he was working as an employee under the appellant as Head Cashier, in charge of the Cash Department, at various branches from 1946 till the date of his filing the application viz.,
There was a slight change made in these two applications in that the applicants stat ed that they were discharging as Head Cashiers multifarious supervisory duties enumerated by them in their applications.
The Labour Court has accepted their claims in full and the management have companye up in appeal to this Court.
1916 to 1918 of 1968.
R. Gokhale, M. K. Ramamurthi and Vineet Kumar, for the respondent in C.A. No.
The management Bank challenged this preliminary order before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No.
It was after the disposal of the Writ Petition by the High Court that the two other applications C.M.Ps.
August 31, 1963 and, as such he was entitled to receive the special allowance under the Sastry Award, as modified, and also under the Desai Award.
115 of 1963 and 4 and 5 of 1965 were filed by the respective respondents before the Labour Court under s. 33C 2 of the Act.
1916 of 1968 .
1917 and 1918 of 1968 .
As the averments companytained in each of these applications were more or less companymon and the basis of the claim for special allowance was also the same, we will refer to the averments made in Application No.
K. Ramamurthi, Shyamala Pappu, J. Ramamurthi and Vineet Kumar, for the respondent in C.A. Nos.
