https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312017 Pharmacists falling under clause (d) of section 31 of the Pharmacy Act were not entitled to the higher pay scale reserved for fully qualified Pharmacists, because pay classification based on educational qualifications and experience was a rational distinction and the principle of equal pay for equal work did not apply mechanically across different classes. At the same time, excess salary paid for years due to no fault of the employees was not recoverable retrospectively, as equity barred recovery or adjustment of amounts already disbursed. The classification was upheld, but retrospective recovery of overpaid salary was prohibited. en-us Tue, 08 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Apr 2025 12:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312017 Pharmacists falling under clause (d) of section 31 of the Pharmacy Act were not entitled to the higher pay scale reserved for fully qualified Pharmacists, because pay classification based on educational qualifications and experience was a rational distinction and the principle of equal pay for equal work did not apply mechanically across different classes. At the same time, excess salary paid for years due to no fault of the employees was not recoverable retrospectively, as equity barred recovery or adjustment of amounts already disbursed. The classification was upheld, but retrospective recovery of overpaid salary was prohibited. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312017