1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Petitioners are employed as Drivers by P.M.D.C. Colleries, Degari, and their duty consists of driving school-vans for taking children of the employees from Degari to schools in Quetta and making the return journey. Petitioners gave a grievance notice, dated 16th July, 1983 to the respondents claiming that they should be given daily-allowances for three and half years and two years and seven months preceding the notice. On the refusal of the respondents 1 and 2 to concede to the demand, petitioners made a joint application on 21st August, 1983 before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Quetta for relief. It is throughout the case of the respondents that in view of the nature of duties of the petitioners as employees on school-vans, the Quetta City is supposed to fall within the jurisdiction of the headquarters in terms of clause 45(b) of P.M.D.C.
2. Travelling Allowance, Rules, as such no daily-allowance was admissible to them. Moreover, the petitioners usually join duty at 6 a.m. And return at 3 p.m. And since the period covered more than usual six working hours, they were paid over time at the rate of 3 hours per day, and this position has been accepted by them without any protest. Further that by an agreement executed on 17th March, 1983 between the Collective Bargaining Agent (CBA) Union and the Management of P.M.D.C.
3. Degari, the Daily Allowance was not payable to the drivers attached to the Bus and School-vans or ambulance.
4. The Labour Court, however, allowed the petitioners' application by the order, dated 29th November, 1954, but on appeal, the Labour Appellate Tribunal set aside that order on the ground which may be reproduced here-under: "Thus daily allowance would come with the concept of travelling allowance and depends on performing touring duties. And Rule 9 classifies different classes of journey in respect of them the travelling allowance may be drawn and they have been enumerated as (i) On Tour (ii) On Transfer
(iii) To appear at an examination as authorised by the corporation (iv) On recall from leave (v) To give evidence to attend a Court of law etc. (vi) To obtain medical treatment and in attendance of an incapacitated employee (vii) on a course of Training (viii) Any other purpose authorised by competent Authority.
5. Daily Allowance is mentioned in Rule 40 which provides that a Daily allowance is a uniform allowance for each day of absence from Headquarters and is intended to cover the ordinary daily charges incurred by an employee in consequence of such absence. Subject to the provisions of Rule 46, it is expected to cover the elements of lodging, board, transport and incidental expenses.
6. And Rule 46 provides that "An employee who has, of necessity to stay in Hotel shall, in addition to the Daily Allowance in Rule 41 be allowed re-imbursement of actual single room rent, subject to the production of Hotel receipts/vouchers (Rule 41 indicates the rates of daily allowance).
7. Thus Daily allowance comes with the concept of travelling allowance and becomes a part of travelling allowance. In the instant case the respondents are employed on school Bus/vans which run between Degari and Quetta perform the entire journey during the day upto 3 or 3.30 p.m. And for such journey the drivers spent a few hours more than usual duty hours. Working beyond normal hours entitles a worker to overtime and not daily allowance and the admitted position is that they are paid overtime allowance. This aspect of the case has escaped the attention of the learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court. It is my considered view that the respondents can have no grievance on that score:'
8. Petitioners then challenged the order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal in a Constitution petition in Baluchistan High Court, but, it was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 17th March, 1986. It is in these circumstances that petitioners now seek leave to appeal.
9. We find that the High Court has adequately dealt with the case andlA correctly interpreted the rules on the subject in these words.
10. "In our view the basic point for consideration is, as to whether Rules are applicable to the petitioners or not. In order to appreciate it may be of advantage to reproduce the same which read as under:-- Rule-30: "Conveyance supplied by Corporation:
(i) Short journey from Headquarter; when an employee travels by conveyance owned by the Corporation and the journey is beyond 10 Kilometres he will be entitled to draw daily allowance of his grade for any day on which he is absent from his headquarter on official duty for more than six consecutive hours and return to his headquarters the same day.
(ii) Journeys during tour; When on journey other than a journey by railway, an employee uses a means of locomotive provided at the expenses of the Corporation he may draw the daily allowance of his grade, and may not exchange it for mileage.
11. Rule 40: Daily Allowance:
(i) A daily allowance is a uniform allowance for each day of absence from headquarters and is intended to cover the ordinary daily charges incurred by an employee in consequence of such absence. Subject to the provisions of Rule 56 it is expected to cover the elements of lodging, board, transport and incidental expenses.
12. However, if the nature of duty involves lot of travelling from one place to another i.e. Collecting quotations, purchasing, attendance in Courts and seeking legal advice of advocates etc., then in such cases, taxi charges can be allowed by the competent authority at their own discretion, keeping in view general conditions and practice of station concerned and depending upon nature of duty and status of the touring employees."
13. A plain reading of the above-quoted rule 30 indicates that it is only applicable to an employee who travels by a conveyance owned by the Corporation and the journey is beyond 10 kilometre. In our view a driver driving a school bus cannot be said to be travelling in a conveyance provided by the P.M.D.C. The above view also gets support by the above quoted rule 40 particularly by sub-para.
(2) of rule 40 which provides that if the nature of duty involves lot of travelling from one place to another i.e. Collecting quotations, purchasing, attendance in Courts and seeking legal advice of Advocates etc., then in such cases, taxi charges can be allowed by the competent Authority at their own discretion, keeping in view general conditions and practice of station concerned and depending upon the nature of duty and status of the touring employees."
14. We entirely agree with these views and find no merit in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed.