https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236458 An earlier writ judgment was recalled because it had been founded on an inadvertent, unauthorised admission that caused an apparent error on the record, and the court's power to correct such error was treated as necessary to prevent injustice. On pay parity, employees deputed and later absorbed were held entitled to the same pay scale and promotional pay scale as the comparable Revenue Department cadre because the posts were shown to be substantially identical in qualifications, duties, responsibilities, and service conditions. The equal pay for equal work principle and the service rules on deputation supported parity. en-us Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236458 An earlier writ judgment was recalled because it had been founded on an inadvertent, unauthorised admission that caused an apparent error on the record, and the court's power to correct such error was treated as necessary to prevent injustice. On pay parity, employees deputed and later absorbed were held entitled to the same pay scale and promotional pay scale as the comparable Revenue Department cadre because the posts were shown to be substantially identical in qualifications, duties, responsibilities, and service conditions. The equal pay for equal work principle and the service rules on deputation supported parity. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236458