-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.1303 OF 2000 Bank of Maharashtra : Petitioner V/s. General Secretary, Bank of Maharashtra Karmchari Sangh : Respondent ... Mr.A.G.Damle for the petitioner. Mr.S.M.Dharap for the respondent. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : MARCH 02, 2009. P.C. 1. The petitioner has challenged the award dated 12.8.1999 passed by the Presiding Officer, First Labour Court, Solapur. The Labour Court has granted reinstatement with back wages to the respondent on account of illegal termination of his services. In addition, the Labour Court has directed that the respondent who has worked as a Daily Deposit Collector shall be entitled to all admissible benefits available to "the workman of the category of doing clerical work in the organisation flows from the law, rule, regulations applicable to the organisation". The order directing reinstatement with back wages is not vitiated by error of law apparent on the -: 2 :- face of the record. The only question is as regards the validity of the aforesaid direction i.e. the grant of admissible benefits to the respondent as if he belongs to clerical category. 2. In Indian Banks Association v. Workmen of Syndicate Bank & Ors. (JT 2001 (2) SC 542), the Supreme Court considered the status of Deposit Collectors similar to the respondent. Their Lordships held as follows:- "28. Mr.Nageshwar Rao is right in his submission that the concession was not binding on his clients. However, what has been conceded has been correctly conceded. No question arose of directing absorption of the deposit collectors as regular workmen. No such demand had been made and, therefore, there could have been no such direction. Such directions were beyond the reference. Even otherwise, the question of absorption would be fully covered by an authority of this Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. K.V.Baby & Anr. reported in [(1999) 1 LLJ 1290]. In this case it has been held that persons who are engaged on the basis of individual -: 3 :- contracts to work on commission basis cannot be equated with regular employees doing similar work. It has been held that the mode of selection and qualifications are not comparable with those of the employees, even though the employees may be doing similar works. In the present case, not only are the modes of selection and qualifications not comparable, but even the work is not comparable. The work which the deposit collectors do is completely different from the work which the regular employees do. There was thus no question of absorption and there was also no question of the deposit collectors being paid the same pay scales, allowances and other service conditions of the regular employees of the banks." 3. In the circumstances, the aforesaid direction of the Labour Court treating the respondent as in clerical grade is hereby set aside. There is no reason to interfere with the rest of the order. 4. Rule is made absolute to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. -: 4 :- S.A. BOBDE, J.