1995 (10) TMI 234 - SC - Indian Laws

Government's Discretion Upheld in Parity Dispute Between Teaching and Library Staff

Sher Singh and Ors. Versus Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Government's decision to disturb parity in pay scales between teaching staff and library staff. It ... - Issues:Whether qualified Librarians employed in the University of Delhi and its constituent colleges are entitled to parity in pay scales with the teaching staff recognized since January 1961.Analysis:The case revolves around the entitlement of qualified Librarians to parity in pay scales with the teaching staff in the University of Delhi and its constituent colleges. The appellants argued that a Committee appointed by the University Grants Commission recommended in 1957 that the status and salary scales of the library staff should be the same as the teaching and research staff. Subsequently, decisions were taken in 1961 and 1968 to maintain parity in pay scales between the two categories. The Third Central Pay Commission also reiterated the principle of parity for school librarians, accepted by the Central Government. However, the Government disturbed the parity retrospectively from 1973, leading to representations and ultimately a Civil Writ Petition filed by the appellants.The respondents opposed the appellants' claim, arguing that the scales given to library staff were not based on scientific justification, as the nature of work, duties, and responsibilities of the two categories of employees are different. The Government decided to upgrade the pay scales of librarians and Directors of Physical Education generally from 1980 after reviewing the matter comprehensively.The Court, after considering the submissions, found no rationale or justification for parity between the teaching staff and the library staff. It emphasized the differences in duties, workload, experience, and responsibilities between the two categories of employees. The Court highlighted that the Government has the authority to change policies based on administrative exigencies, and it is not the Court's role to interfere unless the decision is unfair, malafide, or contrary to statutory directions. The Court concluded that there was no merit in the appeal and dismissed it without costs.In conclusion, the Court upheld the Government's decision to disturb the parity in pay scales between the teaching staff and the library staff, emphasizing the Government's discretion in policy matters and the Court's limited role in interfering with such decisions unless there are clear grounds for judicial review.