AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ram Mohan Reddy
Petitioner a Trade Union espoused the cause of non-payment of Rs.110/- per month towards hill and fuel allowance in terms of Clause 15(b) of the settlement dated 10.4.1989 to one K.S.Siddannaiah, son of Shivalingappa who discharged duties as a Head Cashier from 10.9.1990 to 3.1.3.2001 at Kanathur Village Branch of the respondent State Bank of Mysore. The Government of India referred, for adjudication, fee industrial dispute, to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore, for short ''Tribunal'', whence it was registered as C.R.No.9/2001. Parties entered appearance filed their respective pleadings, following which, the Tribunal by award dated 30.12.2002 allowed the reference. That award when called in question in W.P.No.27858/2003, a learned Single Judge by order dated 2.2.2007, Annexure-B, allowed the writ petition, quashed the award and remitted the proceeding with a direction to the Tribunal to reconsider on the basis of documents filed by the Management and the respondent Union and find out whether the only access to Kanathur was through hilly areas of height which exceeded 1000 meters above MSL.
On remand, parties did not adduce evidence either oral or documentary, but placed reliance upon the documents, earlier, marked in evidence. The Tribunal by award dated 21.1.2011, Annexure-A, the reference, on the premise documents did neither suggest nor indicate anything as to the route through which Kanathur is exclusively accessible, although, staff working in Alur, Belur and Sakaleshpur Branches of State Bank of Mysore were extended the benefit of hill and fuel allowance. Hence, this petition.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the pleadings and examined the award impugned.
Clause 15(b) of the Bipartite Settlement, Annexure-C, relating to hill and fuel allowance reads thus:
15(b) At places which have a height of not less them 750 meters and which are surrounded and accessible only through hills with a height of 1000 meters and above, the Hill and Fuel Allowance shall be paid as is payable at places situated at a height of 1000 meters and above but less than 1500 meters.
The learned Single Judge in that order dated 2.2.2007, Annexure-B, in W.P.No.27858/2003, while remitting the proceeding observed thus:
On these rival contentions though there is reference to the documents produced by the petitioner bank, in the award of the Tribunal, the discussion cm regards the inconsistency between the documents and whether the respondent Union was justified in contending that the only access to Kanathur was through hilly areas which exceeds 1000 meters above MSL the documents- produced by the hank have been completely ignored. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it would require the Tribunal to reconsider that aspect on the basis of the documents produced both by the Management and the respondent Union in finding whether the only access to Kanathur was through hilly areas of the height which exceeded 1000 meters above MSL.
In the light of what is noticed supra, it is apparent that the petitioner ought to have proved that Kanathur Village located at a height of 954 meters above MSL is accessible only through hills with & height of 1000 meters and above, in order to claim hill and fuel allowance. If Alur is 970 meters above MSL, then it is not more than 1000 meters in height, hence accessibility to Kanathur village through Alur not being through hills with a height of 1000 meters and above, on that admitted, fact, petitioner is disentitled to hill and fuel allowance.
The contention that, since staff working in Alur Branch, located at a height of 970 meters above MSL are paid hill and fuel allowance, must necessarily indicate that staff working at Kanathur Branch at a height of 954 meters above MSL, are also entitled to the hill and fuel allowance, cannot be countenanced. Though, learned counsel submits that the certificate issued by the Survey of India discloses that Bikkodu is at the height of 1020 meters above MSL and clarifies that only through this village one can reach Kanathur village, I am afraid, is unacceptable, in the absence of proof of contents of the certificate. Mere production of a certificate, it is well established, does not entail in proof of its contents. If the petitioner did want, to rely upon the certificate issued toy the Surrey of India clarifying the only route through which Kanathur is accessible, it was for the petitioner to lay before the Tribunal, all and every piece of evidence, in proof of its contents, In the absence of intrinsic evidence over the certificate''s contents it cannot be said that the Tribunal was not justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner.
The reason as to why persons working in Alur Branch of respondent Bank are paid hill and fuel allowance, though located at a height of 970 meters above MSL, is not established by cogent evidence so as to claim parity in payment of the said allowance to employees working in Kanathur village Branch, located at a distance of six kilo meters from Alur Village.
Looking at it from any angle, the award of the labour Court, in my considered opinion, is well merited, fully justified and does not call for interference.
Petition, devoid of merit is rejected.