(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the State Bank of India through its Regional Manager and Branch Manager challenging the award of respondent No. 1 passed in favour of respondent No. 2 on 04. 09. 2012 as published on 18. 09. 2012. In the impugned award, respondent No. 1 has directed reinstatement of respondent No. 2 along with payment of 30% back wages from the date of termination of his service till the date of reinstatement. However, respondent No. 2 has been held in the facts and circumstances of the case, as not entitled to regular salary of Peon-cum-Messenger w. e. f. 01. 06. 1993 or from the date of termination as claimed by him.
(2.) The challenge has been made to the award on the ground that the State Bank of India on the basis of agreement with the representatives of Union of Bank employees at all India level had created a Staff Welfare Fund for carrying out various welfare activities. As portion of the fund is allocated to each circle of the Bank for providing canteen facility to the staff of the Bank at concessional rates in the respective Branches. For implementation of various welfare schemes the Local Implementation Committees are constituted at Branch level with the Branch Manager as Ex-officio President and one other employee of the Bank acting as Secretary. The details regarding the constitution and functioning of Local Implementation Committee for providing canteen facilities have been mentioned in the Hand-book of the Staff Welfare Activities pertaining to Staff Welfare Fund. The relevant extract of which has been filed as an annexure to the writ petition.
(3.) It has been stated in the writ petition that canteen, which is run in Branch having staff strength of less than 100 is managed by Local Implementation Committee as aforesaid, which is a non-statutory body and the Bank has nothing to do with the supervision or day-to-day running of the canteens. Reference has been made to Shashtri Award and Desai Award and a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State Bank of India and others vs State Bank of India Canteen Employees Union (Bengal Circle), 2000 2 UPLBEC 1703 to state that Kheshraha Bank Branch at District Siddharth Nagar had a staff of less than 100, and therefore, canteen facility was provided by the Local Implementation Committee only for welfare of the staff. The persons hired by the Local Implementation Committee for serving in the canteen were not recruited by the Bank and the Service Rules of the Bank did not apply to them. In 1993, respondent No. 2 was appointed as a Canteen Boy by the Local Implementation Committee on a fixed salary of Rs. 350/- per month, which was subsequently increased to Rs. 500/- per month and no employer and employee relationship between the Bank and respondent No. 2 existed. At the relevant point of time, there was sufficient Messenger-cum-Peon in the Branch and thus, there was no occasion to take work of Messenger from respondent No. 2.