ASSOCIATE BANKS OFFICERS ASSOCIATION versus STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.
Employees of SBI subsidiary banks cannot be treated as employees of SBI; benefits extended to subsidiary bank employees are result of separate negotiated settlements; doctrine of equal pay for equal work does not apply in cases where differences are rational and based on legitimate grounds; SBI and subsidiaries are not in comparable positions; claim for parity not sustainable.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Associate Banks Officers Association; Respondents: State Bank of India and Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 15 October 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Writ petition dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Parity in Employment, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Terminal Benefits, Medical Benefits, Extra Increments
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Associate Banks Officers Association
Petitioner
State Bank of India and Ors.
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether officers and employees of SBI subsidiary banks are entitled to parity in terminal benefits, medical benefits, and extra increments with SBI employees
- 2 Whether employees of subsidiary banks can be deemed employees of SBI for such purposes
Ratio Decidendi
Employees of SBI subsidiary banks cannot be treated as employees of SBI; benefits extended to subsidiary bank employees are result of separate negotiated settlements; doctrine of equal pay for equal work does not apply in cases where differences are rational and based on legitimate grounds; SBI and subsidiaries are not in comparable positions; claim for parity not sustainable.
Court Disposition
Writ petition dismissed.
Orders
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment