Summary
Reduction of an SBI officer’s overseas salary following a revised cost-of-living assessment was upheld. His posting terms expressly permitted review and revision, and the revised structure applied without discrimination to public-sector bank officers. He had no contractual guarantee of an unchanged dollar salary or right to participate in the salary-fixation process. The Court found a reasonable basis for the decision and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues
- Whether refixation of an overseas officer’s salary under the uniform public-sector bank framework was arbitrary or contrary to the posting terms.
Provisions considered
- Section 18, State Bank of India Act, 1955Government policy directions underlay the Standing Committee framework for overseas salary fixation, which the Court found free of reviewable infirmity. (¶¶ 15–16, 20)
- Clauses 1.1 and 7.3, Overseas posting letter dated 24 June 2000Expressly made the salary and terms subject to change, review and revision; they did not guarantee the original amount for the entire posting. (¶¶ 2–3, 15, 21)
Held
- The express posting terms permitted changes in either direction. The initial salary did not constitute a promise that US$1965 per month would remain payable throughout the foreign posting. (¶¶ 15, 21)
- The revised salary followed the approved formula using updated cost-of-living information and applied in a non-discriminatory manner. Its consideration several months after publication of the data did not itself establish arbitrariness. (¶¶ 16, 18–19, 21)
- Lack of direct contractual privity with the Standing Committee did not invalidate the approved bank salary structure. An employee had no right to be associated with its fixation, although the decision-making process remained open to judicial review for reasonableness. No infirmity was established here. (¶ 20–21)
Result
Appeal allowed; Bombay High Court order set aside and writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs.