http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: UNITED BANK OF INDIA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       21/01/1998

BENCH: SUJATA V. MANOHAR, D.P. WADHWA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T D.P. Wadhwa, J.      The appellant  bank is  aggrieved by the judgment dated May 24,  1991 of  the Division  Bench of  the Guwahati  High Court allowing  the writ  petition of  the  respondents  and holding that  the benefits  which are  being enjoyed  by the transferred officers  of the  bank to  North-Eastern  region could also  be  available  to  respondents  who  are  direct recruits and  posted to  the North-Eastern  region  for  the first time either on probation or otherwise.      The appellant  is a Public Sector Bank. A communication dated  September  1,  1983  was  addressed  by  the  Central Government in the Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs (Banking  Division) to  all the  Chief Executives of Public Sector  Banks on  the subject of ad hoc and temporary incentives to  the employees  of the  Banks posed  in North- Eastern region. The reasons which led the Central Government to issue  such a  communication are stated in the first para of the letter which we reproduce as under :      "Sir,           I am  directed to say that the      question of  providing  special  ad      hoc,   temporary    incentives   to      officers of  Public  Sector  Banks,      with a  view  to  facilitate  their      movement    to     branches/offices      located   in   States   and   Union      Territories    in     North-Eastern      region,     has      been     under      consideration of  the Government of      some time.  In  view  of  the  very      special circumstances prevailing in      the area,  it  is  felt  that  some      special, temporary  incentives need      to be given to such of the officers      as are  posted from  other parts of      the  country   to  BRANCHES/offices      located in States/Union Territories      in the  North-Eastern  Region.  The      Bank could  even ask for volunteers

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

    to be  posted in  the North Eastern      Area for a period of two years."      Thereafter, incentives  were listed  which were  to  be made available  to the transferred officers from other parts of  the  country.  These  are  (i)  transferred  officer  on completion of  his tenure,  be posted  for a period of three years to  a place  of his  choice out  of three places to be indicated by  him; (ii)  the transferred  officer may retain his furnished  or non-furnished  accommodating, as  the case may be,  at the  last place  of his posting or alternatively may be  allotted accommodation  at a  place of his choice on payment of  usual 10% or 12% of his pay, as the case may be. Where the  transferred officer  has not  been provided  with accommodation by  the Bank at his last place of posting, the Bank should,  on request,  provide  him,  on  the  basis  of recovery  of   usual  rent,   accommodation  to  his  family preferably at  a place  indicated by  the officer; (iii) the transferred officer  who retains  the accommodation  at  the last place  of posting  or on  a place  of his choice may be given free furnished single accommodation appropriate to his status  at the new place of posting in North-Eastern region; (iv)  the  transferred  officer  may  be  paid  as  per  the entitlement mid-academic  transfer allowance  for the entire period  of   his  posting   in  the   North-Eastern   region irrespective of  the date  of transfer provided the children of such officer did not join the officer on the new place of posting; (5)  such transferred  officer would be entitled to Leave Travel  Concession once  in a  year to the place where his family  is residing;  and (vi)  the transferred  officer would also  be entitled  to ad  hoc, out of turn increase in salary specifically for the duration of his active duty only in a  post in  the North-Eastern region. The out of turn, ad hoc increase  salary will  be regulated in the manner as the salary  is   fixed  when  an    officer  is  placed  in  the immediately next  higher scale.  Such shall  not confer  any other benefit  than the temporary monetary gain in basic pay and D.A.  for the  specific duration  of active  duty in any post in the North-Eastern region.      Some additional  incentives were  also mentioned  to be provided to  all officers  of the  Bank posted in the North- Eastern region.      On the advice of the Central Government as communicated by letter dated September 1, 1983, the appellant Bank issued guidelines on  January 11, 1984 adopting the same very basis for  grant   of  incentives.  These  incentives  exclusively payable to  transferred officers  were not  to the liking of the directly  recruited officers  which led them to file the writ petition  in the  High Court  and was  allowed  by  the impugned judgment.  Their contention was that the incentives granted to  the transferred  officer of  the Bank from other parts of  the country as per communication of the Bank would also be  applicable to  directly recruited  officers of  the Bank posted  in the North-Eastern region though hailing from different parts  of the  country as  otherwise it  would  be violative of  Article 14  of the  Constitution of India. The High Court relied on its earlier decision in Reserve Bank of India Staff  Officers Association & Ors. Vs. Reserve Bank of India decided  on August  14, 1990 which the High Court said was on  the same  issue of  discrimination. This decision in the Reserve  Bank of India’s case was reversed by this Court by judgment  dated August  9, 1991 on an appeal filed by the Reserve Bank  of India   (Reserve  Bank of India Vs. Reserve Bank of  India Staff  Officers Association  & Ors. [(1991) 4 SCC 132]).  In the  case of  Reserve Bank  of India  certain incentives and  allowances were provided by the reserve Bank

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

to its  officers posted  at Guwahati  who were  not from the North-Eastern region.  Those allowances were generally known as special  duty allowances.  it included an ad hoc increase in salary  for non-local  officers and a option was given to then either  to choose  the   ad hod increase or the special duty allowance  for the period during which they were posted at Guwahati.  The Reserve  Bank declined  to allow  the same allowances to  local officers  posted at  Guwahati  as  were given to  the officers  from other  regions  transferred  to Guwahati.  This   denial  of   allowances  to  the  officers belonging to  North-Eastern region was challenged by them in the Guwahati High Court which upheld their stand. This Court noticed from  the stand  of the  Reserve Bank that there was difficulty in persuading officers of the Bank posted outside the North-Eastern  region to accept transfers to the unit of the Bank in the North-Eastern part of the country which unit was located  at Guwahati  in Assam.  From the  record of the Reserve  Bank,  it  appeared  that    Guwahati  station  was regarded as  hardship station. In the High Court the reserve Bank averred  that the  hardships  raced  by  the  non-local officers were greater than those faced by the local officers and the  scheme of  as hoc incentives was introduced to tide over the problem of adequately staffing the Guwahati office. It were the non-local officers who experienced difficulty in getting accommodation,  getting familiar  with the  language and so  on and  that some incentives had to be given to them to mitigate the hardships experienced by them on transfer to Guwahati. The  High Court,  however, took  the view that all officers  at  Guwahati  local  or  non-local  suffered  from substantially the  same hardship  and that the action of the Reserve  Bank  discriminated  the  local  officers  and  it, therefore,  directed  that  they  must  be  given  the  same benefits as  were given to non-local officers transferred to Guwahati. Correctness  of this  decision was  challenged  in this Court.  This Court  was of  the opinion  that the  High Court was in error in taking the view that the officers from the  North-Eastern   region  who  were  posted  at  Guwahati suffered the  same hardships  as officers from other regions transferred to Guwahati. This Court observed as under:      "A person  transferred from outside      the North-Eastern region to Gauhati      would normally  have to  face  more      severe difficulties than an officer      from   the   North-Eastern   region      posted in Gauhati or, at the least,      the appellant bank could reasonably      take  that   view.   Moreover,   as      pointed out  by the  appellant bank      in  the   counter  that  they  were      finding it  difficult  to  persuade      their officers  from  outside    to      accept transfers  to Gauhati and it      is common  knowledge that an office      of  a  large  bank  cannot  be  run      efficiently  by  officers  a  large      number of  whom  have  been  posted      there by  transfers  against  their      will  and   under  the   threat  of      disciplinary action.  The work done      by them  could hardly   be expected      to be  satisfactory. After all, the      appellant,  the   Reserve  Bank  of      India, is a banking institution and      if in  the interest  of  efficiency      and proper  working  it  bona  fide

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

    took   the    decision,   in    the      circumstances set  out earlier,  to      grant some  extra benefits  to  the      non-local officers  transferred  to      Gauhati with  a  view  to  maintain      efficient working  of its  unit  at      Gauhati,  in  our    opinion,  they      cannot be  treated as  being guilty      of any unlawful discrimination.      The High  Court in  the  impugned  judgment  completely relied on  its decision  in the  Reserve Bank  of India case which decision  did not  find favour  with this  Court.  The facts in  the present  case and that in that Reserve Bank of India case though were somewhat different but the principles as initiated  by this  Court  would  be  applicable  in  the present case  as well.  While the dispute in Reserve Bank of India case  was between  local officers belonging the North- Eastern region and those transferred from other parts of the country, in  the present  case before  us it  is between the officers of the Bank transferred to North-Eastern region and those tho  were directly  recruited   and posted  to  North- Eastern on their first posting.      In our opinion, direct recruits cannot be placed on the same pedestal  as the  officers already  working in the Bank and being  transferred  to  the  North-Eastern  region.  The incentives which have been given to transferred officers are not such as can be granted to the direct recruits posted for the first  time in  the service of the Bank except on of the incentives being  ad hoc,  out of  turn increase  in  salary during the  duration of  the posting  in  the  North-Eastern region. The direct recruited officers, as far as their first posting is  concerned, are  a  class  with  themselves.  For proper functioning  of  its  branch,  the  Bank  also  needs experienced hands.  Howsoever good  a direct recruit may be, he certainly  has no  previous experience  in the working of the appellant Bank. A direct recruit has a choice whether to join the  service of the Bank or not. If he does, he runs on the risk,  if it  is risk,  of being  posted in  the  North- Eastern region on his first posting. In this context, it was submitted by  the  respondents  that  the  promotee  officer cannot refuse  posting in  the North-Eastern  region on  his getting promotion  and that  when such a promotee officer is entitled to  incentives  those  incentives  should  also  be granted to  direct recruit on the same principle. But then a promotee officer  is an  experienced hand  unlike  a  direct recruit. An   employee in the clerical cadre in the Bank can make to  an officer  in Junior management Grade Scale-I only after five  years of service and after passing written test- come-interview. he  has undoubtedly experience of working in the  Bank.   On  promotion,  he  gets  salary  as  a  Junior management Grade Scale-I officer. This he gets from the date of publication of the promotion test results in his original place of  posting, i.e.,  where he  was posted as a Clerk at the time  of his promotion. The appellant bank has contended that such an officer in Junior management Grade Scale-I gets remunerated at his existing place of posting and sending him to North-Eastern  place of posting and sending him to North- Eastern region  as a  promotee officer  would be on transfer and since he was already getting SPF (Special Pay Fixation?) and all  other facilities as a Clerk which were continued to him as  a promotee officer he would thus be also entitled to the incentives.  It  was  also  submitted  that  a  directly recruited probationer  or a promotee officer are unequal and could not be treated alike. As a matter of fact, the plea of discrimination between  a direct  recruit  probationer and a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

promotee officer  on probation  was not  advanced before the High Court. We are of the View that the Bank is right in its submission. A  distinction  was  also  sought  to  be  drawn between transfer  and posting.  Assuming  there  is  such  a distinction  as  contemplated  by  the  communication  dated September 1,  1983 and  the circular issued by the appellant Bank dated January 11, 1984, it is clear that the incentives (mentioned  in   the  earlier  part  of  the  judgment)  are applicable only  to the  transferred  officers  and  certain additional  incentives   would  be  applicable  to  all  the officers  posted   in  the   North-Eastern  region.  Certain incentives are  necessarily required  to  be  given  to  the officers of  the Bank  so that they accept their transfer to hardship stations  in North-Eastern  region for  the  proper functioning  of   the  Branches  of  the  Bank.  That  would certainly be  within the  policy of  the Bank.  It cannot be said that  in not  granting those incentives to the directly recruited officers posted for the first time in the Branches in the North-Eastern region in any way is discriminatory and violative of  Article 14  of the Constitution of India. This Court will Act interfere with the policy devised by the Bank for introduction  of incentives to its transferred employees when  it   has  taken   into  consideration   the  prevalent circumstances in the North-Eastern region and the reluctance of its  experienced  officers  to  be  transferred  to  that region. This  Court in  the Reserve  Bank of  India case has already upheld  the distinction  between local and non-local officers working  in  Reserve Bank unit in the north-Eastern region on similar consideration.      Accordingly. the  appeal is allowed. The judgment dated May 24,  1991 of the High Court of Guwahati is sat aside and the with petition filed by the respondents dismissed.