TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 1357
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SLP (CIVIL) NO. 24410 OF 2013), 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 Si....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judgment rendered, in State of Punjab and Ors. v. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....king, a daily wager, ad hoc or contractual employee shall be entitled to arrears 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctive of sex, was deducible from the Preamble and Articles 14, 16 and 39(d) of the 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 judgm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....women, and children of tender age are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some more sensitive, some requiring more tact, some less. It was therefore held, that the principle of 'equal 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osts, the matter ought to be left for determination to the executive, as the same would have to be examined by expert bodies. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also working in the AIIMS, it was asserted, that the action of the employer was discriminatory towards the Petitioner. (ii) 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 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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) 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 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the pay-scale claimed by the Respondent, was that of the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. It was pointed out, that the Respondent 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 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt, as was extended to Probationary Officers and Trainee Officers (i.e. to the generalist officers). The recommendation made by the Bhatnagar Committee 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that the Probationary Officers/Trainee Officers are being recruited from market/promoted from clerical staff by the Bank by means of all-India written test and interview 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 wer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the specialist officers is also valuable, but that is not to say that the degree of responsibility and reliability is the same as those of the Probationary Officers, the Trainee 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal Assistants was also premised on the fact, that Personal Assistants working in the Civil Secretariat, Haryana, discharged duties which were comparable with that of Personal Assistants 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 rema....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y are satisfied that the decision of the Government is patently irrational, unjust and prejudicial to a Section of employees and the Government while taking the decision has ignored factors which 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....verments made in the writ petition extracted above, nothing is stated as regards the nature of work, responsibilities attached to the Respondent without comparing them with the regularly recruited Junior 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, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le to them. In addition to the above prayers, the Appellants also sought a direction, that the management of the school, be taken over by the State Government. Dissatisfied with the orders passed by the High Court, 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 perfor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or equal work. Any such direction will compel the Government to sanction additional posts in the Offices of the Official Liquidators so as to facilitate payment of salaries and allowances to the company-paid staff in the regular pay 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Pay Scale 9. 22. The claim in the writ petition was not based on the ground that subject post and reference category posts carried similar or identical duties and responsibilities but on the contention that as the subject post holders and the 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 upgradin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0-2640, respectively. After the State Government declined to accept their claim, they approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which accepted their claim. Dissatisfied with the judgment rendered by the High Court, the Union Territory Administration of Chandigarh, approached 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e summarised to the effect that parity of pay can be claimed by invoking the provisions of Articles 14 and 39(d) of the Constitution of India by establishing that the eligibility, mode of selection/recruitment, nature and quality of work and duties and effort, reliability, confidentiality, dexterity, functional 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 r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by a two-Judge bench: In the above matter, the Appellant was originally appointed as a Laboratory Assistant in Group D, in the National Dairy Research Institute. He was promoted as a Lower Division Clerk, after he qualified a limited departmental competitive examination. He was further promoted as a Senior Clerk, again after 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. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... This Court concluded the issue by holding as under: 20. We are also not inclined to accept the submission of the Appellant that there can be no distinction in the pay scales between the employees working at headquarters and the employees working at the institutional level. It is a matter of record that the employees working at headquarters are 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 compl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... given job. The accuracy required and the dexterity that the job may entail may differ from job to job. It cannot be judged by the mere volume of work. There may be qualitative difference as regards reliability and responsibility. Functions may be the same but the responsibilities make a difference. Thus, normally the applicability of this principle must be left to be evaluated 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 Rou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with in the case of SC Chandra v. State of Jharkhand (2007) 8 SCC 279, where the plea for parity in employment was rejected thereby refusing to give parity in salary claim by school teachers with class working under Government of Jharkhand and BCCL. The discussion which ensued, while rejecting such a claim, is recapitulated hereunder in the majority opinion authored by A.K. Mathur, J.: (SCC p. 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) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emporary employees (differently designated as work-charge, daily-wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the like) raised a claim for being extended wages, equal to those being drawn by regular employees, and the parameters determined by this Court, in furtherance of such a claim. Insofar as the present controversy is concerned, the same falls under the present category. 26. Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P. (1986) 1 SCC 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 basi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution Bench of this Court. It was held, that the Central Government, the State Governments and likewise, all public sector undertakings, were expected to function like model and enlightened employers and further, the argument that the above principle was merely an abstract doctrine, which could not be enforced through a Court of law, could not be raised either by the State or by State undertakings. The petitions were accordingly 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 r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. It was held, that the only relevant consideration was, whether the nature of duties and functions discharged and the work done was similar. While concluding, this Court clarified that in the instant case, it was dealing with temporary employees engaged by the same employer, doing work of the same nature, as was being required of those engaged in the regular cadre, on a regular basis. 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 consist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Telegraphs Department, was revised as under: (i) Casual semi-skilled/skilled labour who has not completed 720 days of service over a period of three years or more with the department. No change. They will continue to be paid at the approved local rates. (ii) Casual semi-skilled/skilled labour who has completed 720 days of service over a period of three years or more. Daily wage equal to 75 per cent of 1/30th of the minimum of the scale of semi-skilled (Rs. 210-270) or skilled (Rs. 260-350) as the 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 e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nant position, and compel any worker to work even as a casual labourer on starvation wages. It was pointed out, that a casual labourer who had agreed to work on such low wages, had done so, because he had no other choice. In the opinion of this Court, it was poverty, that had driven the workers to accept such low wages. In the above view of the matter, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court held that classification of employees into regularly recruited employees and casual employees for the purpose of paying less than the minimum wage payable to employees in the corresponding 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on had approached this Court, for the first time, in 1984, by filing writ petition No. 13924 of 1984. In the above petition, the relief claimed was for payment of wages under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. The Petitioners sought parity with employees of the New Delhi Municipal Committee, and also, with employees of other departments of the Delhi Administration, and the Union of India. They approached this Court again by filing civil writ petition No. 869 of 1988, which was disposed of by the above cited case. (ii) The Petitioners were employees of Grih Kalyan Kendras. They 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a two-Judge bench: The Respondents in this case were engaged by the Ghaziabad Development Authority, on daily-wage basis. The instant judgment has been referred to only because it was cited by the learned Counsel for the Appellants. In the cited case, the claim raised by the Respondents was not based on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', yet it would be relevant to mention, that while disposing of the appeal preferred by the Ghaziabad Development Authority, this Court held that the Respondents, who were engaged as temporary daily-wage employees, would not be entitled to pay at par with 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 claimin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r employees. 34. State of Punjab v. Devinder Singh (1998) 9 SCC 595, decided by a two-Judge bench: The Respondents were daily-wage Ledger-Keepers/Ledger Clerks engaged by the State of Punjab. They approached the Punjab & Haryana High Court, claiming salary and allowances, as were being paid to regular employees holding similar posts. The High Court held in their favour, and directed the State Government to pay to the Respondents, salary and allowances, as were being paid to regular employees holding similar posts. The aforesaid decision was rendered because the High Court accepted their contention, that they 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, allowe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....servants, based on the employees having rendered long years of service, as temporary, contractual, casual, daily-wage or on ad-hoc basis. It is, however relevant to mention, that the Constitution Bench did examine the question of wages, which such employees were entitled to draw. In paragraph 8 of the judgment, a reference was made to civil appeal Nos. 3595-612 of 1999, wherein, the Respondent-employees were temporarily engaged on daily-wages in the Commercial Taxes Department. As they had rendered service for more than 10 years, they claimed permanent employment in the department. They also claimed benefits as were extended 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 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction of the High Court directing the Government to consider their cases for regularization. We also notice that the High Court has not adverted to the aspect as to whether it was regularization or it was giving permanency that was being directed by the High Court. In such a situation, the direction in that regard will stand deleted and the appeals filed by the State would stand allowed to that extent. If sanctioned posts are vacant (they are said to be vacant) the State will take immediate steps for filling those posts by a regular process of selection. But when regular recruitment is undertaken, the Respondents in C.A. Nos. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... pay for equal work" is not an abstract doctrine and is capable of being enforced in a Court of law. But equal pay must be for equal work of equal value. The principle of "equal pay for equal work" has no mechanical application in every case. Article 14 permits reasonable classification based on qualities or characteristics of persons recruited and grouped together, as against those who were left out. of course, the qualities or characteristics must have a reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved. In service matters, merit or experience can be a proper basis for classification for the purposes of pay in order to promote efficiency 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 wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....who were rendering the same duties and responsibilities as regular employees, would be entitled to the minimum wage in the pay-scale payable to regular employees. It is only because the said factual determination had not been rendered by the High Court, the matter was remanded back, for a fresh adjudication on the above limited issue. 38. State of U.P. v. Putti Lal (2006) 9 SCC 337, decided by a three-Judge bench: The question which arose for adjudication was, whether the Respondents who were daily-rated wage earners in the Forest Department, were entitled to regularization, and should be paid the minimum of the pay-scale as was payable to 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 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ers laid down in the judgments rendered by this Court, would entitle the Respondent-employees to any benefit under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. Herein again, the principle in question, was considered as applicable to temporary employees. 40. Uttar Pradesh Land Development Corporation v. Mohd. Khursheed Anwar (2010) 7 SCC 739, decided by a two-Judge bench: In the instant case, the Respondents were employed on contract basis, on a consolidated monthly salary of Rs. 2000/-. Prior to their appointment, they were interviewed by a selection committee alongwith other eligible candidates, and were found to be suitable for the job. Their contractual 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 adju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....im was rejected by the High Court. While adjudicating upon the appeal preferred by the Appellants, this Court held as under: 9. We are of the view that the real issue is whether persons employed on stopgap or ad hoc basis were entitled to the benefit of pay scales with increments during the period of service on daily or stopgap or ad hoc basis. Unless the Appellants are able to establish that either under the contract, or applicable rules, or settled principles of service jurisprudence, they are entitled to the benefit of pay scale with increments during the period of their stopgap/ad hoc service, it cannot be said that the Appellants have the right to claim the benefit 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 duti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se (1988) 3 SCC 91, the Mewa Ram Kanojia case (1989) 2 SCC 235, the Grih Kalyan Kendra Workers' Union case (1991) 1 SCC 619 and the S.C. Chandra case (2007) 8 SCC 279). (iv) Persons holding the same rank/designation (in different departments), but having dissimilar powers, duties and responsibilities, can be placed in different scales of pay, and cannot claim the benefit of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' (see-the Randhir Singh case (1982) 1 SCC 618, State of Haryana v. Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Association (2002) 6 SCC 72, and the Hukum Chand Gupta case (2012) 12 SCC 666). Therefore, the principle would not be automatically invoked, merely because the subject 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, an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (x) A comparison between the subject post and the reference post, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', cannot be made, where the subject post and the reference post are in different establishments, having a different management. Or even, where the establishments are in different geographical locations, though owned by the same master (see-the Harbans Lal case (1989) 4 SCC 459). Persons engaged differently, and being paid out of different funds, would not be entitled to pay parity (see-Official Liquidator v. Dayanand (2008) 10 SCC 1). (xi) Different pay-scales, in certain eventualities, would be permissible even for posts clubbed together at the same hierarchy in the cadre. As for instance, if the duties and responsibilities 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 p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of employees of a different organization, there can be no question of equation of pay-scales, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', even if two organizations have a common employer. Likewise, if the management and control of two organizations, is with different entities, which are independent of one another, the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would not apply (see-the S.C. Chandra case (2007) 8 SCC 279, and the National Aluminum Company Limited case (2014) 6 SCC 756). 43. We shall now venture to summarize the conclusions recorded by this Court, with reference to a claim of pay parity, raised by temporary employees (differently designated as work-charge, daily-wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the like), in the following two paragraphs. 44. We shall first 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 employe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under P&T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch case (1988) 1 SCC 122 this Court held, that under principle flowing from Article 38(2) of the Constitution, Government could not deny a temporary employee, at least the minimum wage being paid to an employee in the corresponding regular cadre, alongwith dearness allowance and additional dearness allowance, as well as, all the other benefits which were being extended to casual workers. It was also held, that the classification of workers (as unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled), doing the same work, into different categories, for payment of wages at different rates, was not tenable. It was also held, that such an act of an employer, would amount to exploitation. And further that, the same would be arbitrary and discriminatory, and therefore, violative of Articles 14 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 incumbe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tant Engineer, this Court directed the employer to pay the Respondents wages, in the minimum of the pay-scales ascribed for the post of Assistant Engineer. 45. We shall now attempt an analysis of the judgments, wherein this Court declined to grant the benefit of 'equal pay for equal work' to temporary employees, in a claim for pay parity with regular employees: (i) In the Harbans Lal case (1989) 4 SCC 459, daily-rate employees were denied the claimed benefit, under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', because they could not establish, that the duties and responsibilities of the post(s) held by them, were similar/equivalent to those of the reference posts, under the State Government. (ii) In the Grih Kalyan Kendra Workers' Union case (1991) 1 SCC 619, ad-hoc employees engaged in the Kendras, were denied pay parity with regular employees 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing paid to regular employees. A series of reasons were recorded, to deny them pay parity under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. This Court expressed the view, that daily-wagers could not be treated at par with persons employed on regular basis, because they were not required to possess qualifications prescribed for appointment on regular basis. Daily-wagers, it was felt, were not selected in the same manner as regular employees, inasmuch as, a regular appointee had to compete in a process of open selection, and would be appointed, only if he fell within the zone of merit. It was also felt, that daily-wagers were not required to fulfill the prescribed requirement of age, at the time of their recruitment. And also because, regular employees were subject to disciplinary proceedings, whereas, daily-wagers were not. Daily-wagers, it was held, could also not be equated with regular employees, 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 fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of disciplinary action, are therefore to the advantage of regular employees, and the absence of their applicability, is to the disadvantage of temporary employees, even though the judgment in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77, seems to project otherwise. (v) Even the issue of transferability of regular employees referred to in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 11 SCC 77, in our view, has not been examined closely. Inasmuch as, temporary employees can be directed to work anywhere, within or outside their cadre, and they have no choice but to accept. This is again, a further disadvantage suffered by temporary employees, yet the judgment projects as if it is to their advantage. (vi) It is also necessary to appreciate, that in all temporary appointments (-work-charge, daily-wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the like), the distinguishing features referred to in State of Haryana v. Jasmer Singh (1996) 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. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oncept of "equal pay for equal work" is different from the concept of conferring permanency on those who have been appointed on ad hoc basis, temporary basis, or based on no process of selection as envisaged by the rules. This Court has in various decisions applied the principle of equal pay for equal work and has laid down the parameters for the application of that principle. The decisions are rested on the concept of equality enshrined in our Constitution in the light of the directive principles in that behalf. But the acceptance of that principle cannot lead to a position where the court could direct that appointments made without following the due procedure established by law, be deemed permanent or issue directions to treat them as permanent. Doing so, would be negation of the principle of equality of opportunity. The power to make an order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before this Court, would not normally be used for giving the 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 Const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ular appointment could be made only by making appointments consistent with the requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The right to be treated equally with the other employees employed on daily wages, cannot be extended to a claim for equal treatment with those who were regularly employed. That would be treating unequals as equals. It cannot also be relied on to claim a right to be absorbed in service even though they have never been selected in terms of the relevant recruitment rules. The arguments based on Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution are therefore overruled. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the observations recorded by this Court, as were relied upon by the full bench (-as also, by the learned Counsel representing the State of Punjab). It is not possible for us to concur with the inference drawn by the full bench, for the reasons recorded hereunder: (i) We are of the considered view, that in paragraph 44 extracted above, the Constitution Bench clearly 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es Department were in service for more than ten years. They were appointed in 1985-1986. They were sought to be regularized in terms of a scheme. Recommendations were made by the Director, Commercial Taxes for their absorption. It was only when such recommendations were not acceded to, the Administrative Tribunal was approached. It rejected their claim. The High Court, however, allowed their prayer which was in question before this Court. 28. This Court stated: (Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1, pp. 19-20, para 8) 8. ... It is seen that the High Court without really coming to grips with the question falling for decision in the light of the findings of the Administrative Tribunal and the decisions of this Court, proceeded to order that they are entitled to wages equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in government service with effect from the dates from which they were respectively appointed. It may be noted that this gave retrospective 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 regularisat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be the extent of the exercise of power by this Court Under Article 142 of the Constitution to do justice to them. 30. We, therefore, do not see that any law has been laid down in para 55 of the judgment in Umadevi case. Directions were issued in view of the limited controversy. As indicated, the State's grievances were limited. Yet again, we are of the view, that the full bench erred in referring to the above observations, to draw its conclusions. Our reasons are summarized hereinbelow: (i) It is apparent, that this Court in State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh (2009) 9 SCC 514, did hold, that the determination rendered in paragraph 55 of the judgment in the Secretary, State of Karnataka case (2006) 4 SCC 1, was in exercise of the power vested in this Court, Under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. But the above observation does not lead, to the conclusion or the inference, that the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' is not applicable to temporary employees. In fact, there is a positive take-away for the temporary employees. The Constitution Bench would, in the above situation, be deemed to have concluded, that to do complete justice to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judgment in the Secretary, State of Karnataka case (2006) 4 SCC 1. Learned Counsel for the State of Punjab also referred to the same, to canvass the case of the State government. Relevant observations relied upon, are reproduced below: 7. We are of the view that the Appellants are not entitled to get the benefit of regularization of their services since they were never appointed in any sanctioned posts. The Appellants were only engaged on daily wages in the Bihar Intermediate Education Council. 8. In State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3) (2006) 4 SCC 1, this Court held that the Courts are not expected to issue any direction for absorption/regularization or permanent continuance of temporary, contractual, casual, daily-wage or ad hoc employees. This Court held that such directions issued could not be said to be inconsistent with the constitutional scheme of public employment. This Court held that merely because a temporary employee or a casual wage worker is continued for a time beyond the term of his appointment, he would not be entitled to be absorbed in regular service or made permanent, merely on the strength of such continuance, if the original appointment was not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate of Maysore v. S.V. Narayanappa AIR 1967 SC 1071, R.N. Nanjundappa v. T. Thimmiah (1972) 1 SCC 409, and B.N. Nagarajan v. State of Karnataka (1979) 4 SCC 507, and referred to in para 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of the courts or of tribunals. The question of regularisation of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases above referred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one-time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontinuous working, a daily wager, ad hoc or contractual employee shall be entitled to arrears for a period of three years and two months. A perusal of the above conclusion drawn in the impugned judgment (passed by the full bench), reveals that the full bench carved an exception for employees who were not appointed against regular sanctioned posts, if their services had remained continuous (with notional breaks, as well), for a period of 10 years. This category of temporary employees, was extended the benefit of wages at the minimum of the regular pay-scale. In the Secretary, State of Karnataka case (2006) 4 SCC 1, similarly, employees who had rendered 10 years service, were granted an exception (refer to paragraph 53 of the judgment, extracted in the preceding paragraph). The above position adopted by the High Court reveals, that the High Court intermingled the legal position determined by this Court on the subject of regularization of employees, while adjudicating upon the proposition of pay parity, emerging under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. In our view, it is this mix-up, which has resulted in the High Court recording its afore-extracted conclusions. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 of the Constitution of India. The parameters of the principle, have been summarized by us in paragraph 42 hereinabove. The principle of 'equal pay for equal work' has also been extended to temporary employees (differently described as work-charge, daily-wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the like). The legal position, relating to temporary employees, has been summarized by us, in paragraph 44 hereinabove. The above legal position which has been repeatedly declared, is being reiterated by us, yet again. 55. In our considered view, it is fallacious to determine artificial parameters to deny fruits of labour. An employee engaged for the same work, cannot be paid less than another, who performs the same duties and responsibilities. Certainly not, in a welfare state. Such an action besides being demeaning, strikes at the very foundation of human dignity. Any one, who is compelled to work at a lesser wage, does not do so voluntarily. He does so, to provide food and shelter to his family, at the cost of his self respect and dignity, at the cost of his self worth, and at the cost of his integrity. For he knows, that his dependents would suffer immensely, if he does not acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yees, holding the same/corresponding posts. This exercise would require the application of the parameters of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' summarized by us in paragraph 42 above. However, insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, it is not difficult for us to record the factual position. We say so, because it was fairly acknowledged by the learned Counsel representing the State of Punjab, that all the temporary employees in the present bunch of appeals, were appointed against posts which were also available in the regular cadre/establishment. It was also accepted, that during the course of their employment, the concerned temporary employees were being randomly deputed to discharge duties and responsibilities, which at some point in time, were assigned to regular employees. Likewise, regular employees holding substantive posts, were also posted to discharge the same work, which was assigned to temporary employees, from time to time. There is, therefore, no room for any doubt, that the duties and responsibilities discharged by the temporary employees in the present set of appeals, were the same as were being discharged by regular employees. It is....