TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 1357
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIVIL APPEAL NO. 871 OF 2014, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10366 OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO. 4340 OF 2014) AND CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10527 OF 2014 J.S. KHEHAR AND S.A. BOBDE, JJ. For the Appellant : Rakesh Kumar Khanna, AAG, Nabhanya Sharma, Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Kaveeta Wadia, Kuldeep Singh (NP), Advs. for Mahalakshmi Balaji & Co. (NP) and Naresh Bakshi (NP), Advs. For the Respondent : Shish Pal Laler, S.D. Sharma, Sonit Sinhmar, Balbir Singh Gupta, S.K. Sabharwal (NP), Jagdev Singh Manhas, Kailash Chand (NP), Bhaskar Y. Kulkarni (NP), Ajay Kumar Singh, Ashwani Bhardwaj, S.L. Aneja, A. Venayagam Balan, Manju Sharma, Anil Kumar Tandale (NP), R.C. Kaushik (NP), Ashok Mathur (NP), A.S. Pundir (NP), Vanita Mehta (NP), Subhasish Bhowmick (NP), Prem Prakash (NP), Balraj Dewan (NP) and Yash Pal Dhingra, Advs. JUDGMENT J.S. Khehar, J. 1. Delay in filing and refiling Special Leave Petition (Civil).... CC No. 15616 of 2011, and Special Leave Petition (Civil).... CC No. 16434 of 2011 is condoned. Leave is granted in all special leave petitions. 2. A division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Rajinder Singh and Ors. (LPA No. 337 of 2003, decided on 7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rajinder Singh and Ors. (LPA No. 337 of 2003) was not noticed by the later division bench - in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Rajinder Kumar (LPA No. 1024 of 2009). Noticing a conflict of views expressed in the judgments rendered by two division benches in the above matters, a learned single Judge of the High Court, referred the matter for adjudication to a larger bench, on 11.5.2011. It is, therefore, that a full bench of the High Court, took up the issue, for resolving the dispute emerging out of the differences of opinion expressed in the above two judgments, in Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors. (CWP No. 14796 of 2003), alongwith connected writ petitions. The full bench rendered its judgment on 11.11.2011. The present bunch of cases, which we have taken up for collective disposal, comprise of a challenge to the judgment rendered by the division bench of the High Court in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Rajinder Singh and Ors. (LPA No. 337 of 2003, decided on 7.1.2009); a challenge to the judgment, referred to above, in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Rajinder Kumar (LPA No. 1024 of 2009, decided on 30.8.2010); as also, a challenge to the judgment rendered by the full bench of the Hig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrears for a period of three years and two months. 6. The issue which has arisen for consideration in the present set of appeals, necessitates a bird's eye view on the legal position declared by this Court, on the underlying ingredients, which govern the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. It is also necessary for resolving the controversy, to determine the manner in which this Court has extended the benefit of "minimum of the regular pay-scale" alongwith dearness allowance, as revised from time to time, to temporary employees (engaged on daily-wage basis, as ad-hoc appointees, as employees engaged on casual basis, as contract appointees, and the like). For the aforesaid purpose, we shall, examine the above issue, in two stages. We shall first examine situations where the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' has been extended to employees engaged on regular basis. And thereafter, how the same has been applied with reference to different categories of temporary employees. 7. Randhir Singh v. Union of India (1982) 1 SCC 618, decided by a three-Judge bench: The Petitioner in the instant case, was holding the post of Driver-Constable in the Delhi Police Fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Constitution. The principle of 'equal pay for equal work', was held to be applicable to cases of unequal scales of pay, based on no classification or irrational classification, though both sets of employees (- engaged on temporary and regular basis, respectively) performed identical duties and responsibilities. (iii) The Court arrived at the conclusion, that there could not be the slightest doubt that Driver-Constables engaged in the Delhi Police Force, performed the same functions and duties, as other Drivers in the services of the Delhi Administration and the Central Government. Even though he belonged to a different department, the Petitioner was held as entitled to the pay-scale of Rs. 260-400. 8. D.S. Nakara v. Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 304, decided by a five-Judge Constitution Bench: It is not necessary for us to narrate the factual controversy adjudicated upon in this case. In fact, the main issue which arose for consideration pertained to pension, and not to wages. Be that as it may, it is of utmost importance to highlight the following observations recorded in the above judgment: 32. Having succinctly focused our attention on the conspectus of elements and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength. Article 41 obligates the State within the limits of its economic capacity and development, to make effective provision for securing the right to work, to education and to provide assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want. Article 43(3) requires the State to endeavour to secure amongst other things full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities. It is however impossible to overlook, that the Constitution Bench noticed the Randhir Singh case (1982) 1 SCC 618, and while affirming the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', extended it to pensionary entitlements also. 9. Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers (Recognized) v. Union of India (1988) 3 SCC 91, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Petitioners in the above case, were Personal Assistants and Stenographers attached to heads of departments in the Customs and Central Excise Department, of the Ministry of Finance. They were placed in the pay-scale of Rs. 550-900. The Petitioners claimed, that the basic qualifications, the method, manner and source of recruitme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l pay for equal work' could not be translated into a mathematical formula. Interference in a claim as the one projected by the Petitioners at the hands of a Court, would not be possible unless it could be demonstrated, that either the differentiation in the pay-scale was irrational, or based on no basis, or arrived at mala fide, either in law or on fact. In the light of the stance adopted by the Respondents, it was held that it was not possible to say, that the differentiation of pay in the present controversy, was not based on a rational nexus. In the above view of the matter, the prayer made by the Petitioners was declined. 10. State of U.P. v. J.P. Chaurasia (1989) 1 SCC 121, decided by a two-Judge bench: Prior to 1965, Bench Secretaries in the High Court of Allahabad, were placed in a pay-scale higher than that allowed to Section Officers. Bench Secretaries were placed in the pay-scale of Rs. 160-320 as against the pay-scale of Rs. 100-300 extended to Section Officers. A Rationalization Committee, recommended the pay-scale of Rs. 150-350 for Bench Secretaries and Rs. 200-400 for Section Officers. While examining the recommendation, the State Government placed Bench Secreta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....odies. It was however held, that whenever it was felt, that expert bodies had not evaluated the duties and responsibilities in consonance with law, the matter would be open to judicial review. In the present case, while acknowledging that at one time Bench Secretaries were paid more emoluments than Section Officers, it was held, that since successive Pay Commissions and even Pay Rationalization Committees had found, that Section Officers performed more onerous duties, bearing greater responsibility as compared to Bench Secretaries, it was not possible for this Court to go against the said opinion. As such, this Court rejected the prayer of the Bench Secretaries as of right, to be assigned a pay-scale equivalent to or higher than that of Section Officers. (iv) With reference to the second question, namely, whether there could be two scales of pay in the same cadre, of persons performing the same or similar work or duties, this Court expressed the view, that all Bench Secretaries in the High Court of Allahabad performed the same duties, but Bench Secretaries Grade-I were entitled to a higher pay-scale than Bench Secretaries Grade-II, on account of their selection as Bench Secretarie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Whilst controverting the claim of the Petitioner it was pointed out, that the post of Hearing Therapist was not comparable with the posts referred to by the Petitioner. It was contended, that neither the qualifications nor the duties and functions of the posts referred to by the Petitioner, were similar to that of Hearing Therapist. In the absence of equality between the post of Hearing Therapist, and the other posts referred to by the Petitioner, it was asserted, that the claim of the Petitioner was not acceptable under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. (iii) During the course of hearing, the Petitioner confined his claim for parity only with the post of Audiologist. It was urged, that educational qualifications, as well as, duties and functions of the posts of Hearing Therapist and Audiologist were similar (if not the same). It was contended, that a Hearing Therapist was required to treat the deaf and other patients suffering from hearing defects. A Hearing Therapist is required to help in the rehabilitation of persons with hearing impairments. It was also pointed out, that an Audiologist's work was to coordinate the separate professional skills, which con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fits like gratuity, pension, provident fund etc. (iii) In the first instance, this Court endeavoured to deal with the question, whether the employers of these workers were denying them wages as were being paid to other similarly placed employees, doing the same or similar work. The question came to be examined for the reason, that unless the Petitioners could demonstrate that the employees of the Grih Kalyan Kendras, were being discriminated against on the subject of pay and other emoluments, with other similarly placed employees, the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would not be applicable. During the course of the first adjudication in writ petition No. 13924 of 1984, this Court requested a former Chief Justice of India, to make recommendations after taking into consideration, firstly, whether other similarly situated employees (engaged in similar comparable posts, putting in comparable hours of work, in a comparable employment) were being paid higher pay, and if so, what should be the entitlement of the agitating employees, so as not to violate the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', and secondly, if there was no other similar comparable employment, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was holding an inferior post-of Naik (Radio Operator). It was highlighted, that the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, was a promotional post, for the post held by the Respondent. Secondly, it was asserted on behalf of the Union of India, that the Respondent had not placed any material before the Court, on which the High Court could have arrived at the conclusion, that the essential qualifications of the post against which the Respondent claimed parity, as also, the method of recruitment thereto, were the same as that of the post held by the Respondent. Thirdly, the post of Naik (Radio Operator) held by the Respondent was extended the benefit of special pay of Rs. 80/- per month, and that, there was nothing on the record of the case to show, that Radio Operators in the Central Water Commission or the Directorate of Police Wireless, were enjoying similar benefits. (iii) This Court while accepting the contentions advanced at the hands of the Union of India held, that the pay-scale claimed by the Respondent was that for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector, which admittedly was a promotional post for Naik (Radio Operator), i.e., the post held by the Respondent. And as such, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ttee was accepted, and accordingly, Rural Development Officers were extended the same fitment of salary, as generalist officers. (ii) Since the benefit of additional increment was denied to other specialist officers, they also made a grievance and claimed the benefit of additional increments, as had been extended to Rural Development Officers. Since the State Bank of India did not accede to their request, they approached the Karnataka High Court. The specialist officers claimed, that in all respects, they performed similar duties and responsibilities, as Rural Development Officers, and therefore, they were entitled to the benefit of additional increments, at the time of their appointment, as had been extended to Rural Development Officers. A learned single Judge of the High Court, on being impressed by the fact, that some of the Rural Development Officers, who had not opted for absorption in the generalist cadre (but had continued under the specialist cadre), were also extended the benefit of higher starting pay, accepted the claim of the specialist officers. Appeals preferred against the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge, were dismissed by a division bench of the High....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rview to get the best talent from the market and within, with a view to man the Bank's top management in due course. Leaned counsel for the Respondents submitted that the same is also true of specialist officers. However, it is contended on behalf of the Appellant Bank that the generalist officers are exposed to various assignments including mandatory rural assignments. Unlike them, the services of Assistant Law Officers are utilized as in-house advisors on legal matters in administrative offices. The duties and responsibilities of Probationary Officers/Trainee Officers are more onerous while the specialist officers are not exposed to operational work/risk. It is, therefore, quite clear that there exists a valid distinction in the matter of work and nature of operations between the specialist officers and the general category officers. The general category officers are directly linked to the banking operations whereas the specialist officers are not so linked and they perform the specified nature of work. RDOs were given similar fitment as the generalist officers since it was found that they were required to shoulder, by and large, the same duties and responsibilities as Probat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inee Officers, and the RDOs, who directly carry on the banking operations and are required to take crucial decisions based on the advice tendered by the specialist officers. The Bank has considered the nature of duties and responsibilities of the various categories of officers and has reached bona fide decision that while generalist officers take all crucial decisions in banking operations with which they are directly linked, and are exposed to operational work and risk since the decisions that they take has significant effect on the functioning of the bank and quality of its performance, the specialist officers are not exposed to such risks nor are they required to take decisions as vital as those to be taken by the generalist officers. They at best render advice in their specialized field. The degree of reliability and responsibility is not the same. It cannot be said that the value judgment of the Bank in this regard is either unreasonable, arbitrary or irrational. Having regard to the settled principles and the parameters of judicial interference, we are of the considered view that the decision taken by the Bank cannot be faulted on the ground of its being either unreasonable, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stants in the Central Secretariat. And so also, their responsibilities. (iii) The High Court allowed the claim of the Association. It held, that Personal Assistants working in the Civil Secretariat, Haryana, were entitled to the pay-scale of Rs. 2000-3500, with effect from 1.1.1986. The State of Haryana approached this Court. This Court, while recording its consideration, expressed the view, that the High Court had ignored certain settled principles of law, while determining the claim of Personal Assistants, by applying the principle of parity. This Court felt, that the High Court was persuaded to accept the claim of Personal Assistants, only because of the designation of their post. This, it was held, was a misconceived application of the principle. In its analysis, it was recorded, that the High Court had assumed, that the assertions made at the behest of the Personal Assistants, that they were discharging similar duties and responsibilities as Personal Assistants in the Central Secretariat, had remained unrebutted. That, this Court found, was factually incorrect. The State of Haryana, in its counter affidavit before the High Court, had adopted the specific stance, that there wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich are material and relevant for a decision in the matter. Even in a case where the court holds the order passed by the Government to be unsustainable then ordinarily a direction should be given to the State Government or the authority taking the decision to reconsider the matter and pass a proper order. The court should avoid giving a declaration granting a particular scale of pay and compelling the government to implement the same. As noted earlier, in the present case the High Court has not even made any attempt to compare the nature of duties and responsibilities of the two Sections of the employees, one in the State Secretariat and the other in the Central Secretariat. It has also ignored the basic principle that there are certain rules, Regulations and executive instructions issued by the employers which govern the administration of the cadre. 16. Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology v. Manoj K. Mohanty (2003) 5 SCC 188, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Respondent in the above case, was appointed as a Typist in 1990, on a consolidated salary of Rs. 530/- per month, against a vacancy of the post of Junior Assistant. It was his averment, that even though in the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ior Assistants. It cannot be disputed that there were neither necessary averments in the writ petition nor any material was placed before the High Court so as to consider the application of principle of "equal pay for equal work". Based on the fact, that the Respondent had not placed sufficient material on the record of the case, to demonstrate the applicability of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', this Court set aside the order passed by the High Court, directing that the Respondent be paid wages in the regular scale of pay, with effect from September, 1997. 17. Government of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy (2004) 1 SCC 347, decided by a three-Judge bench: There were two technical posts, namely, Operator-cum-Mechanic and Sub-Assistant Engineer, in the Irrigation Department, of the Government of West Bengal. In 1970, the State Government revised pay-scales. During the aforesaid revision, the pay-scale of the post of Operator-cum-Mechanic, which was initially Rs. 180-350, was revised to Rs. 230-425, with effect from 1.4.1970. The pay-scale of the post of Sub-Assistant Engineer was simultaneously revised to Rs. 350-600, with a higher initial start of Rs. 330, with effect fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the employees of the school approached this Court. This Court disposed of the matter by recording the following conclusion: 21. Learned Counsel for the Appellants have relied on Article 39(d) of the Constitution. Article 39(d) does not mean that all the teachers working in the school should be equated with the clerks in BCCL or the Government of Jharkhand for application of the principle of equal pay for equal work. There should be total identity between both groups i.e. the teachers of the school on the one hand and the clerks in BCCL, and as such the teachers cannot be equated with the clerks of the State Government or of BCCL. The question of application of Article 39(d) of the Constitution has recently been interpreted by this Court in State of Haryana v. Charanjit Singh (2006) 9 SCC 321, wherein Their Lordships have put the entire controversy to rest and held that the principle, "equal pay for equal work" must satisfy the test that the incumbents are performing equal and identical work as discharged by employees against whom the equal pay is claimed. Their Lordships have reviewed all the cases bearing on the subject and after a detailed discussion have finally put the contro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scale from the Consolidate Fund of India and in view of our finding that the policy decision taken by the Government of India to reduce the number of posts meant for direct recruitment does not suffer from any legal or constitutional infirmity, it is not possible to entertain the plea of the Respondents for payment of salaries and allowances in the regular pay scales and other monetary benefits on a par with regular employees by applying the principle of equal pay for equal work. 20. State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association (2010) 5 SCC 225, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Respondent Association represented the cadre of Inspector (Agricultural Minimum Wages), before the High Court of Calcutta. The claim made before the High Court was, that the said cadre was entitled to parity in pay-scales, with the posts of Inspector (Cooperative Societies), Extension Officer (Panchayats) and Revenue Officer. The aforesaid claim of parity was based on the sole consideration, that the posts of Inspector (Agricultural Minimum Wages) on the one hand, and the posts of Inspector (Cooperative Societies), Extension Officer (Panchayats) and Revenue Officer on the other,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....holders of reference category posts who were enjoying equal pay at an earlier point of time, should be continued to be given equal pay even after pay revision. In other words, the parity claimed was not on the basis of equal pay for equal work, but on the basis of previous equal pay. 23. It is now well-settled that parity cannot be claimed merely on the basis that earlier the subject post and the reference category posts were carrying the same scale of pay. In fact, one of the functions of the Pay Commission is to identify the posts which deserve a higher scale of pay than what was earlier being enjoyed with reference to their duties and responsibilities, and extend such higher scale to those categories of posts. 24. The Pay Commission has two functions; to revise the existing pay scale, by recommending revised pay scales corresponding to the pre-revised pay scales and, secondly, make recommendations for upgrading or downgrading posts resulting in higher pay scales or lower pay scales, depending upon the nature of duties and functions attached to those posts. Therefore, the mere fact that at an earlier point of time, two posts were carrying the same pay scale does not mean that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d this Court. (ii) During the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, a direction was issued to the Union Territory Administration of Chandigarh, to appoint a 'High Level Equivalence Committee', to examine the nature of duties and responsibilities of the post of Senior Dietician working under the Union Territory Administration of Chandigarh, vis-a-vis, Dietician (gazetted) working under the State of Punjab. And also to examine the nature of duties and responsibilities of the post of Dietician, working under the Union Territory Administration of Chandigarh, vis-a-vis, Dietician (non-gazetted) working under the State of Punjab, and submit a report. A report was accordingly submitted to this Court (which is extracted in the above judgment). (iii) In its report, the 'High Level Equivalence Committee' arrived at the conclusion, that the duties and responsibilities of the posts held by the Respondents, and the corresponding reference posts with which they were claiming parity, were not comparable or equivalent. As such, this Court recorded the following observations: 9. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. We find from the report of the High Level....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctional need and responsibilities and status of both the posts are identical. The functions may be the same but the skills and responsibilities may be really and substantially different. The other post may not require any higher qualification, seniority or other like factors. Granting parity in pay scales depends upon the comparative evaluation of job and equation of posts. The person claiming parity, must plead necessary averments and prove that all things are equal between the posts concerned. Such a complex issue cannot be adjudicated by evaluating the affidavits filed by the parties. 31. The onus to establish the discrimination by the employer lies on the person claiming the parity of pay. The Expert Committee has to decide such issues, as the fixation of pay scales etc. falls within the exclusive domain of the executive. So long as the value judgment of those who are responsible for administration i.e. service conditions, etc., is found to be bonafide, reasonable, and on intelligible criteria which has a rational nexus of objective of differentiation, such differentiation will not amount to discrimination. It is not prohibited in law to have two grades of posts in the same c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er qualifying a limited departmental competitive examination. At this stage, he was placed in the pay-scale of Rs. 1200-2040. He was further promoted to the post of Superintendent in the pay-scale of Rs. 1640-2900, yet again, after passing a departmental examination. Eventually, he was promoted as an Assistant Administrative Officer, on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research revised the pay-scales of Assistants, from Rs. 1400-2600 to Rs. 1640-2900, with effect from 1.1.1986. However, the pay-scale of the post of Superintendent was not revised. (ii) The Appellant submitted a representation seeking revision of his pay-scale on the ground, that in the headquarters of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, the post of Superintendent is a promotional post, from the post of Assistant (which carried the pay-scale of Rs. 1640-2900). He also claimed parity in pay-scale with one J.I.P. Madan. The claim of the Appellant was not accepted by the authorities, whereupon, he first approached the Administrative Tribunal and eventually the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which also did not accept his contention. It is, therefore, that he approached t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re governed by a completely different set of rules. Even the hierarchy of the posts and the channels of promotion are different. Also, merely because any two posts at the headquarters and the institutional level have the same nomenclature, would not necessarily require that the pay scales on the two posts should also be the same. In our opinion, the prescription of two different pay scales would not violate the principle of equal pay for equal work. Such action would not be arbitrary or violate Articles 14, 16 and 39D of the Constitution of India. It is for the employer to categorize the posts and to prescribe the duties of each post. There can not be any straitjacket formula for holding that two posts having the same nomenclature would have to be given the same pay scale. Prescription of pay scales on particular posts is a very complex exercise. It requires assessment of the nature and quality of the duties performed and the responsibilities shouldered by the incumbents on different posts. Even though, the two posts may be referred to by the same name, it would not lead to the necessary inference that the posts are identical in every manner. These are matters to be assessed by exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uated and determined by an expert body. These are not matters where a writ court can lightly interfere. Normally a party claiming equal pay for equal work should be required to raise a dispute in this regard. In any event, the party who claims equal pay for equal work has to make necessary averments and prove that all things are equal. Thus, before any direction can be issued by a court, the court must first see that there are necessary averments and there is a proof.'* (Emphasis supplied) In our opinion, the aforesaid observations would be a complete answer to all the submissions made by the Appellant. For the above reasons, this Court rejected the claim of the Appellant, based on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. 24. National Aluminum Company Limited v. Ananta Kishore Rout (2014) 6 SCC 756, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Appellant in the above matter, i.e., National Aluminum Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as, NALCO) had established two schools. In the first instance, NALCO itself looked after the management of the said schools. In 1985, it entered into two separate but identical agreements with the Central Chinmoy Mission Trust, Bombay, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....289, paras 20-21) 20. After going through the order of the Division Bench we are of opinion that the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court is correct. Firstly, the school is not being managed by BCCL as from the facts it is more than clear that BCCL was only extending financial assistance from time to time. By that it cannot be saddled with the liability to pay these teachers of the school as being paid to the clerks working with BCCL or in the Government of Jharkhand. It is essentially a school managed by a body independent of the management of BCCL. Therefore, BCCL cannot be saddled with the responsibilities of granting the teachers the salaries equated to that of the clerks working in BCCL. 21. Learned Counsel for the Appellants have relied on Article 39(d) of the Constitution. Article 39(d) does not mean that all the teachers working in the school should be equated with the clerks in BCCL or the Government of Jharkhand for application of the principle of equal pay for equal work. There should be total identity between both groups i.e. the teachers of the school on the one hand and the clerks in BCCL, and as such the teachers cannot be educated with the clerks o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C 637, decided by a two-Judge bench: Two Class-IV employees of the Nehru Yuvak Kendra, Dehradun, engaged as casual workers on daily-wage basis, claimed that they were doing the same work as Class-IV employees appointed on regular basis. The reason for denying them the pay-scale extended to regular employees was, that there was no sanctioned post to accommodate the Petitioners, and as such, the assertion on behalf of the Respondent-employer was, that they could not be extended the benefits permissible to regular employees. Furthermore, their claim was sought to be repudiated on the ground, that the Petitioners had taken up their employment with the Nehru Yuvak Kendra knowing fully well, that they would be paid emoluments of casual workers engaged on daily-wage basis, and therefore, they could not claim beyond what they had voluntarily accepted. (ii) This Court held, that it was not open to the Government to exploit citizens, specially when India was a welfare state, committed to a socialist pattern of society. The argument raised by the Government was found to be violative of the mandate of equality, enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. This Court held that the mandate of A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allowed, and the Nehru Yuvak Kendras were directed to pay all daily-rated employees, salaries and allowances as were paid to regular employees, from the date of their engagement. 28. Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana (1987) 4 SCC 634, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Education Department of the State of Haryana, was pursuing an adult education scheme, sponsored by the Government of India, under the National Adult Education Scheme. The object of the scheme was to provide functional literacy to illiterates, in the age group of 15 to 35, as also, to impart learning through special contract courses, to students in the age group of 6 to 15, comprising of dropouts from schools. The Petitioners were appointed as Supervisors. They were paid remuneration at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month, as fixed salary. Prior to 7.3.1984, they were paid fixed salary and allowance, at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month. Thereafter, the fixed salary was enhanced to Rs. 150/- per month. The reason for allowing them fixed salary was, that they were required to work, only on part-time basis. The case set up by the State Government was, that the Petitioners were not full-time employees; their mode of recruitme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asis. It was held, that the Petitioners, who were engaged on temporary basis as Supervisors, were entitled to be paid on the same basis, and in the same pay-scale, at which those employed in the regular cadre discharging similar duties as Supervisors, were being paid. 29. Daily Rated Casual Labour Employed under P&T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India (1988) 1 SCC 122, decided by a two-Judge bench: The persons on whose behalf the Mazdoor Manch had approached this Court Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, were working as daily-rated casual labourers, in the Posts and Telegraphs Department. They included three broad categories of workers, namely, unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled. The unskilled labour consisted of Safai Workers, Helpers, Peons, and the like. The unskilled labour was engaged in digging, carrying loads and other similar types of work. The semi-skilled labour consisted of Carpenters, Wiremen, Draftsmen, A.C. Mechanics etc. They needed to have technical experience, but were not required to possess any degree or diploma qualification. The skilled labour consisted of labourers doing technical work. The skilled labourers were re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case may be, plus admissible DA/ADA thereon. (iii) Casual labour who has completed 1200 days of service over a period of 5 years or more. Daily wage equal to 1/30th of the minimum of the pay scale of semi-skilled (Rs. 210-270) skilled (Rs. 260-350) as the case may be, plus DA/ADA admissible thereon. (iv) All the casual semi-skilled/skilled labour will, however continue to be employed on daily wages only. (v) These orders for enhanced rates for category (ii) and (iii) above will take effect from April 1, 1984. (vi) A review for making further officials eligible for wages vide (ii) and (iii) above will take effect as on first of April every year. (vii) If the rates calculated vide (ii) and (iii) above happen to be less than the approved local rates, payment shall be made as per approved local rates for above categories of labour. (viii) The above arrangements of enhanced rates of daily wages will be without prejudice to absorption of casual semi-skilled/skilled labour against regular vacancies as and when they occur..... (iii) Aggrieved by the discrimination made against them, through the aforementioned orders dated 15.5.1980 and 26.7.1984, the Mazdoor Manch submitted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g regular cadres, particularly in the lowest rung in the department, where the pay-scales were the least, was not tenable. This Court also held that the classification of labourers into three categories (depicted in the orders dated 15.5.1980 and 26.7.1984, extracted above) for the purpose of payment of wages at different rates, was not tenable. It was held, that such a classification was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, besides being opposed to the spirit of Article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, which exhorts all State parties to ensure fair wages and equal wages for equal work. Accordingly, this Court directed the Union of India, and the other Respondents, to pay wages to the workmen, who were engaged as casual labourers, belonging to different categories, at rates equivalent to the minimum pay, in the pay-scales of regularly employed workers, in the corresponding cadres, but without any increments. The workers were also held to be entitled to corresponding dearness allowance and additional dearness allowance, if any, payable thereon. It was also directed, that whatever other benefits were being extended to casu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y desired the Union of India, to pay them wages in the regular pay-scales, at par with other employees performing similar work, under the New Delhi Municipal Committee, or the Delhi Administration, or the Union of India. It would be relevant to mention, that the Petitioner-Workers' Union, was representing employees working on ad-hoc basis. Some of them were being paid a fixed salary (described as honorarium), while others were working on piece-rate wages at the production centres, without there being any provision for any scale of pay, or other benefits like gratuity, pension, provident fund etc. (iii) This Court, in the first instance, endeavoured to deal with the question, whether employers of these workers, were denying them wages as were being paid to other similarly placed employees, doing the same or similar work. The question came to be examined on account of the fact, that unless the Petitioners could demonstrate, that the employees of the Grih Kalyan Kendras were being discriminated against, on the subject of pay and other emoluments, with other similarly placed employees, the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would not be applicable. During the course o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th regular employees, but would be entitled to pay in the minimum wages prescribed under the statute, if any, or the prevailing wages as available in the locality. It would, therefore, be improper for us to treat this judgment as laying down any principle emerging from the concept of 'equal pay for equal work'. 33. State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Respondents were employed as Mali-cum-Chowkidars/Pump Operators on daily-wage basis, under the employment of the Government of Haryana. They had approached the High Court claiming the same salary as was being paid to the regularly employed persons, holding similar posts in the State of Haryana. The instant prayer was made by the Respondents, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. The above prayer made by the Respondents, was granted by the High Court. The High Court issued a direction to the State Government, to pay the Respondents, the same salary and allowances as were being paid to regular employees holding similar posts, with effect from the dates on which the Respondents were engaged by the State Government. (ii) This Court held, that the Respondents wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y were doing the same work as was taken from regular Ledger-Keepers/Ledger Clerks. Their prayer was accordingly accepted, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. (ii) This Court was of the view that the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' could enure to the benefit of the Respondents to the limited extent, that they could have been paid the minimum of the pay-scale of Ledger-Keepers/Ledger Clerks, appointed on regular basis. This conclusion was drawn by applying the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. This Court, therefore, allowed the prayer made by the State Government to the aforesaid limited extent. The right claimed by the Respondents, to be paid in the same time scale, as regularly employed Ledger-Keepers/Ledger Clerks were being paid, was declined. 35. State of Haryana v. Tilak Raj (2003) 6 SCC 123, decided by a two-Judge bench: Thirty five Respondents were appointed at different points of time, as Helpers on daily-wages by the Haryana Roadways. They filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, claiming regularization because they had rendered long years of service. They also claimed salary, as was payable to r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ended to regular employees of their cadre, including wages (equal to their salary and allowances) with effect from the dates from which they were appointed. Even though the administrative tribunal had rejected their claim, by returning a finding, that they had not made out a case for payment of wages, equal to those engaged on regular basis, the High Court held that they were entitled to wages, equal to the salary of regular employees of their cadre, with effect from the date from which they were appointed. The direction issued by the High Court resulted in payment of higher wages retrospectively, for a period of 10 and more years. It would also be relevant to mention, that in passing the above direction, the High Court had relied on the decision rendered by a three-Judge bench of this Court in Dharwad District PWD Literate Daily-Wage Employees Association v. State of Karnataka (1990) 2 SCC 396. The Constitution Bench, having noticed the contentions of the rival parties, on the subject of wages payable to daily-wagers, recorded its conclusions as under: 55. In cases relating to service in the commercial taxes department, the High Court has directed that those engaged on daily wag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3595-3612 and those in the Commercial Taxes Department similarly situated, will be allowed to compete, waiving the age restriction imposed for the recruitment and giving some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a significant period of time. That would be the extent of the exercise of power by this Court Under Article 142 of the Constitution to do justice to them. We have extracted the aforesaid paragraph, so as not to make any inference on our own, but to project the determination rendered by the Constitution Bench, as was expressed by the Bench. We have no hesitation in concluding, that the Constitution Bench consciously distinguished the issue of pay parity, from the issue of absorption/regularization in service. It was held, that on the issue of pay parity, the High Court ought to have directed, that the daily-wage workers be paid wages equal to the salary at the lowest grade of their cadre. The Constitution Bench expressed the view, that the concept of equality would not be applicable to the issue of absorption/regularization in service. And conversely, on the subject of pay parity, it was unambiguously held, that daily-wage earners should be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficiency in administration. A higher pay scale to avoid stagnation or resultant frustration for lack of promotional avenues is also an acceptable reason for pay differentiation. The very fact that the person has not gone through the process of recruitment may itself, in certain cases, make a difference. If the educational qualifications are different, then also the doctrine may have no application. Even though persons may do the same work, their quality of work may differ. Where persons are selected by a Selection Committee on the basis of merit with due regard to seniority a higher pay scale granted to such persons who are evaluated by the competent authority cannot be challenged. A classification based on difference in educational qualifications justifies a difference in pay scales. A mere nomenclature designating a person as say a carpenter or a craftsman is not enough to come to the conclusion that he is doing the same work as another carpenter or craftsman in regular service. The quality of work which is produced may be different and even the nature of work assigned may be different. It is not just a comparison of physical activity. The application of the principle of "equal p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o a regular worker, holding a corresponding post in the Government. On the above issue, this Court in the above judgment, recorded the following conclusion: 5. In several cases this Court applying the principle of equal pay for equal work has held that a daily-wager, if he is discharging the similar duties as those in the regular employment of the Government, should at least be entitled to receive the minimum of the pay scale though he might not be entitled to any increment or any other allowance that is permissible to his counterpart in the Government. In our opinion that would be the correct position and we, therefore, direct that these daily-wagers would be entitled to draw at the minimum of the pay scale being received by their counterparts in the Government and would not be entitled to any other allowances or increment so long as they continue as daily-wagers. The question of their regular absorption will obviously be dealt with in accordance with the statutory Rules already referred to. It is therefore apparent, that in the instant judgment, the three-Judge bench extended the benefit of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' to persons engaged on daily-wage ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tual appointment was continued from time to time. Though they were employed on contract basis, the fact that two posts of Assistant Engineer and one post of Junior Engineer were vacant at the time of their engagement, was not disputed. The Respondents were not given any specific designation. The Allahabad High Court, while accepting the claim filed by the Respondents, held that they were entitled to wages in the regular pay-scale of Rs. 2200-4000, prescribed for the post of Assistant Engineer. (ii) This Court, while adjudicating upon the controversy arrived at the conclusion, that the High Court had granted relief to the Respondents on the assumption that two vacant posts of Assistant Engineer were utilized for appointing the Respondents. The above impression was found to be ex-facie fallacious, by this Court. This Court was of the view, that the orders of appointment issued to the Respondents, did not lead to the inference, that they were appointed against the two vacant posts of Assistant Engineer. Despite the above, this Court held, that the decision of the Appellant Corporation to effect economy by depriving the Respondents even, the minimum of pay-scale, was totally arbitrary....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nefit of pay scales with increments. The Consideration 42. All the judgments noticed in paragraphs 7 to 24 hereinabove, pertain to employees engaged on regular basis, who were claiming higher wages, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. The claim raised by such employees was premised on the ground, that the duties and responsibilities rendered by them, were against the same post for which a higher pay-scale was being allowed, in other Government departments. Or alternatively, their duties and responsibilities were the same, as of other posts with different designations, but they were placed in a lower scale. Having been painstakingly taken through the parameters laid down by this Court, wherein the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' was invoked and considered, it would be just and appropriate, to delineate the parameters laid down by this Court. In recording the said parameters, we have also adverted to some other judgments pertaining to temporary employees (also dealt with, in the instant judgment), wherein also, this Court had the occasion to express the legal position with reference to the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. Our c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct and reference posts have the same nomenclature. (v) In determining equality of functions and responsibilities, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', it is necessary to keep in mind, that the duties of the two posts should be of equal sensitivity, and also, qualitatively similar. Differentiation of pay-scales for posts with difference in degree of responsibility, reliability and confidentiality, would fall within the realm of valid classification, and therefore, pay differentiation would be legitimate and permissible (see-the Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers (Recognized) case (1988) 3 SCC 91 and the State Bank of India case (2002) 4 SCC 556). The nature of work of the subject post should be the same and not less onerous than the reference post. Even the volume of work should be the same. And so also, the level of responsibility. If these parameters are not met, parity cannot be claimed under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' (see-State of U.P. v. J.P. Chaurasia (1989) 1 SCC 121, and the Grih Kalyan Kendra Workers' Union case (1991) 1 SCC 619). (vi) For placement in a regular pay-scale, the claimant has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilities of one of the posts are more onerous, or are exposed to higher nature of operational work/risk, the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would not be applicable. And also when, the reference post includes the responsibility to take crucial decisions, and that is not so for the subject post (see-the State Bank of India case (2002) 4 SCC 556). (xii) The priority given to different types of posts, under the prevailing policies of the Government, can also be a relevant factor for placing different posts under different pay-scales. Herein also, the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would not be applicable (see-State of Haryana v. Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Association (2002) 6 SCC 72). (xiii) The parity in pay, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', cannot be claimed, merely on the ground, that at an earlier point of time, the subject post and the reference post, were placed in the same pay-scale. The principle of 'equal pay for equal work' is applicable only when it is shown, that the incumbents of the subject post and the reference post, discharge similar duties and responsibilities (see-State of West Benga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rst outline the conclusions drawn in cases where a claim for pay parity, raised at the hands of the concerned temporary employees, was accepted by this Court, by applying the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', with reference to regular employees: (i) In the Dhirendra Chamoli case (1986) 1 SCC 637 this Court examined a claim for pay parity raised by temporary employees, for wages equal to those being disbursed to regular employees. The prayer was accepted. The action of not paying the same wage, despite the work being the same, was considered as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It was held, that the action amounted to exploitation-in a welfare state committed to a socialist pattern of society. (ii) In the Surinder Singh case (1986) 1 SCC 639 this Court held, that the right of equal wages claimed by temporary employees emerged, inter alia, from Article 39 of the Constitution. The principle of 'equal pay for equal work' was again applied, where the subject employee had been appointed on temporary basis, and the reference employee was borne on the permanent establishment. The temporary employee was held entitled to wages drawn by an employee on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and 16 of the Constitution. (v) In State of Punjab v. Devinder Singh (1998) 9 SCC 595 this Court held, that daily-wagers were entitled to be placed in the minimum of the pay-scale of regular employees, working against the same post. The above direction was issued after accepting, that the concerned employees, were doing the same work as regular incumbents holding the same post, by applying the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. (vi) In the Secretary, State of Karnataka case (2006) 4 SCC 1, a Constitution Bench of this Court, set aside the judgment of the High Court, and directed that daily-wagers be paid salary equal to the lowest grade of salary and allowances being paid to regular employees. Importantly, in this case, this Court made a very important distinction between pay parity and regularization. It was held that the concept of equality would not be applicable to issues of absorption/regularization. But, the concept was held as applicable, and was indeed applied, to the issue of pay parity-if the work component was the same. The judgment rendered by the High Court, was modified by this Court, and the concerned daily-wage employees were directed to be paid wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mployees working under the New Delhi Municipal Committee, or the Delhi Administration, or the Union of India, because of the finding returned in the report submitted by a former Chief Justice of India, that duties and responsibilities discharged by employees holding the reference posts, were not comparable with the posts held by members of the Petitioner union. (iii) In State of Haryana v. Tilak Raj (2003) 6 SCC 123, this Court took a slightly different course, while determining a claim for pay parity, raised by daily-wagers (-the Respondents). It was concluded, that daily-wagers held no post, and as such, could not be equated with regular employees who held regular posts. But herein also, no material was placed on record, to establish that the nature of duties performed by the daily-wagers, was comparable with those discharged by regular employees. Be that as it may, it was directed, that the State should prescribe minimum wages for such workers, and they should be paid accordingly. (iv) In State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh (2009) 9 SCC 514, this Court held, that for the applicability of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', the Respondents who were daily-wagers, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, because regular employees were liable to be transferred anywhere within their cadre. This Court therefore held, that those employed on daily-wages, could not be equated with regular employees, and as such, were not entitled to pay parity, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. (ii) First and foremost, it is necessary to emphasise, that in the course of its consideration in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77, this Court's attention had not been invited to the judgment in the Bhagwan Dass case (1987) 4 SCC 634, wherein on some of the factors noticed above, a contrary view was expressed. In the said case, this Court had held, that in a claim for equal wages, the manner of selection for appointment would not make any difference. It will be relevant to notice, that for the posts under reference in the Bhagwan Dass case (1987) 4 SCC 634, the selection of those appointed on regular basis, had to be made through the Subordinate Selection Board, by way of open selection. Whereas, the selection of the Petitioners as daily-wagers, was limited to candidates belonging to a cluster of villages, and was not through any specialized selection body/agency.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 11 SCC 77, are inevitable, yet in all the judgments referred to above (rendered before and after, the judgment in the State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77), the proposition recorded in the instant judgment, was never endorsed. (vii) It is not the case of the Appellants, that the Respondent-employees do not possess the minimum qualifications required to be possessed for regular appointment. And therefore, this proposition would not be applicable to the facts of the cases in hand. (viii) Another reason for us in passing by, the judgment in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77 is, that the bench deciding the matter had in mind, that daily-wagers in the State of Haryana, were entitled to regularization on completion of 3/5 years of service, and therefore, all the concerned employees, would in any case be entitled to wages in the regular pay-scale, after a little while. This factual position was noticed in the judgment itself. (ix) It is not necessary for us to refer the matter for adjudication to a larger bench, because the judgment in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77, is irreconcilable and inconsistent with a large number of judgments,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... go-by to the procedure established by law in the matter of public employment.... .....It would not be just or proper to pass an order in exercise of jurisdiction Under Article 226 or 32 of the Constitution or in exercise of power Under Article 142 of the Constitution permitting those persons engaged, to be absorbed or to be made permanent, based on their appointments or engagements. Complete justice would be justice according to law and though it would be open to this Court to mould the relief, this Court would not grant a relief which would amount to perpetuating an illegality. xxx xxx &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y distinguished the issues of pay parity, and regularization in service. It was held, that on the issue of pay parity, the concept of 'equality' would be applicable (as had indeed been applied by the Court, in various decisions), but the principle of 'equality' could not be invoked for absorbing temporary employees in Government service, or for making temporary employees regular/permanent. All the observations made in the above extracted paragraphs, relate to the subject of regularization/permanence, and not, to the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. As we have already noticed above, the Constitution Bench unambiguously held, that on the issue of pay parity, the High Court ought to have directed, that the daily-wage workers be paid wages equal to the salary, at the lowest grade of their cadre. This deficiency was made good, by making such a direction. (ii) Insofar as paragraph 48 extracted above is concerned, all that needs to be stated is, that they were merely submissions of learned Counsel, and not conclusions drawn by this Court. Therefore, nothing further needs to be stated, with reference to paragraph 48. (iii) We are therefore of the view, tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pective effect to the judgment of the High Court by more than 12 years. The High Court also issued a command to the State to consider their cases for regularisation within a period of four months from the date of receipt of that order. The High Court seems to have proceeded on the basis that, whether they were appointed before 1-7-1984, a situation covered by the decision of this Court in Dharwad District PWD Literate Daily Wage Employees Assn. v. State of Karnataka (1990) 2 SCC 396, and the scheme framed pursuant to the direction thereunder, or subsequently, since they have worked for a period of 10 years, they were entitled to equal pay for equal work from the very inception of their engagement on daily wages and were also entitled to be considered for regularisation in their posts. 29. It is in the aforementioned factual backdrop, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction Under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, directed: (Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1, p. 43, para 55) 55. ... Hence, that part of the direction of the Division Bench is modified and it is directed that these daily-wage earners be paid wages equal to the salary at the lowest gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y employees. The Constitution Bench would, in the above situation, be deemed to have concluded, that to do complete justice to the cause of temporary employees, they should be paid the minimum wage of a regular employee, discharging the same duties. It needs to be noticed, that on the subject of pay parity, the findings recorded by this Court in the Secretary, State of Karnataka case (2006) 4 SCC 1, were limited to the conclusions recorded in paragraph 55 thereof (which we have dealt with above, while dealing with the case law, on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'). (ii) Even in the case under reference-State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh (2009) 9 SCC 514, this Court accepted the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', as applicable to temporary employees, by requiring the State to examine the claim of the Respondents for pay parity, by appointing an expert committee. The expert committee was required to determine, whether the Respondents satisfied the conditions stipulated in different judgments of this Court including State of Punjab v. Charanjit Singh (2006) 9 SCC 321, wherein this Court had acceded to the proposition, that daily-wagers who were renderin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade permanent, merely on the strength of such continuance, if the original appointment was not made by following a due process of selection as envisaged by the relevant rules. In view of the law laid down by this Court, the directions sought for by the Appellants cannot be granted. 9. Paragraph 53 of Umadevi (3) judgment, deals with irregular appointments (not illegal appointments). The Constitution Bench specifically referred to the judgments in State of Mysore v. S.V. Narayanappa AIR 1967 SC 1071, and R.N. Nanjundappa v. T. Thimmiah (1972) 1 SCC 409, in para 15 of Umadevi (3) judgment as well. Let us refer to paras 15 and 16 of Umadevi (3) judgment in this context. Xxx xxx &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularisation, if any already made, but not sub judice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme. A perusal of paragraph 53 extracted above, leaves no room for any doubt, that the issue canvassed was of regularization, and not pay parity. We are therefore of the view, that reliance on paragraph 53, for determining the question of pay parity (claimed by the concerned employees), resulted in the High Court drawing an incorrect inference. 51. The full bench of the High Court, while adjudicating upon the above controversy had concluded, that temporary employees were not entitled to the minimum of the regular pay-scale, merely for the reason, that the activities carried on by daily-wagers and regular employees were similar. The full bench however, made two exceptions. Temporary employees, who fell in either of the two exceptions, were held entitled to wages at the minimum of the pay-scale drawn by regular emp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cording its afore-extracted conclusions. (ii) The High Court extended different wages to temporary employees, by categorizing them on the basis of their length of service. This is clearly in the teeth of judgment in the Daily Rated Casual Labour Employed under P&T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch case (1988) 1 SCC 122. In the above judgment, this Court held, that classification of employees based on their length of service (-those who had not completed 720 days of service, in a period of 3 years; those who had completed more than 720 days of service-with effect from 1.4.1977; and those who had completed 1200 days of service), for payment of different levels of wages (even though they were admittedly discharging the same duties), was not tenable. The classification was held to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. (iii) Based on the consideration recorded hereinabove, the determination in the impugned judgment rendered by the full bench of the High Court, whereby it classified temporary employees for differential treatment on the subject of wages, is clearly unsustainable, and is liable to be set aside. 52. In view of all our above conclusions, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... immensely, if he does not accept the lesser wage. Any act, of paying less wages, as compared to others similarly situate, constitutes an act of exploitative enslavement, emerging out of a domineering position. Undoubtedly, the action is oppressive, suppressive and coercive, as it compels involuntary subjugation. 56. We would also like to extract herein Article 7, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966. The same is reproduced below: Article 7 The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular: (a) Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with: (i) Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work; (ii) A decent living for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant; (b) Safe and healthy working conditions;] (c) Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher leve....