STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. versus M.R. GANESH BABU AND ORS.

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. versus M.R. GANESH BABU AND ORS.

Bank's value judgment, based on intelligible criterion with rational nexus to distinction in duties and responsibilities between generalist and specialist officers, is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or discriminatory; specialist officers do not bear same operational responsibility or risks as generalist officers or...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: State Bank of India; Respondent: M.R. Ganesh Babu; Respondent: Other respondents (Technical Officers, Assistant Engineer (Civil), Assistant Law Officers)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Karnataka High Court, Civil Appeal Nos. 3769 3772 of 2000
Outcome
Appeals allowed; respondent's writ petitions rejected.
Legal Topics
Equal Pay for Equal Work, Discrimination, Classification in Employment, Bank Officers—generalist and Specialist Distinction
Service Law Equal Pay for Equal Work Discrimination Classification in Employment Bank Officers—generalist and Specialist Distinction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State Bank of India

Appellant

M.R. Ganesh Babu

Respondent

Other respondents (Technical Officers, Assistant Engineer (Civil), Assistant Law Officers)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Karnataka High Court, Civil Appeal Nos. 3769 3772 of 2000

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Applicability of principle of equal pay for equal work
  2. 2 Whether specialist officers are entitled to benefit of higher starting salary as Generalist Officers and R.D.Os.
  3. 3 Whether Bank's value judgment regarding distinction in duties is arbitrary, unreasonable, or discriminatory

Ratio Decidendi

Bank's value judgment, based on intelligible criterion with rational nexus to distinction in duties and responsibilities between generalist and specialist officers, is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or discriminatory; specialist officers do not bear same operational responsibility or risks as generalist officers or R.D.Os; judicial interference is inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; respondent's writ petitions rejected.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of Karnataka High Court dated 8 June 1999 set aside.
  • Writ petitions preferred by respondents are rejected.