SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 354

1997(3) Supreme 517
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and G.T. Nanavati, JJ.
Shiba Kumar Dutta & Ors. -Petitioners
versus
Union of India & Ors. -Respondents
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 5081 of 1997
(CC - 1733/97)
Decided on 24-2-1997
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Petitioners : K.C. Dua, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
It is difficult for the Courts to go into the question of equation of posts or fitment into a particular scale of pay unless the action was arbitrary or there was invidious discrimination between persons similarly situated, doing same type of work.

Headnote:SERVICE LAW-Petitioners working as Fitters-Claim for equal pay on par with Jig Borers-Nomenclature and fitment is one of the executive policy of the Government-Court cannot go into the question of equation of posts or fitment into a particular pay scale unless action was arbitrary or there was invidious discrimination. (Para 3)

       

ORDER

Delay condoned.

2. This special leave petition arises from the orders of the Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, made on June 21, 1995 in OA No. 213 of 1992 and the Review Order dated July 26, 1996.

3. The admitted position is that the petitioners, who are working as Fitters (T & G), had sought to be fused in the category of, and to be on par with, Jig Borers. They sought equal pay on par with them. They contend that they were drawing higher pay-scales than the Fitter; instead of elevating their cadre and placing them in the higher pay-scales, they have been brought them down in the category as a Fitter after removing the two nomenclatures. Thereby, it is arbitrary on account of invidious discrimination. The Third Pay Commission had gone into that aspect of the matter and fixed the scales of pay. Thereafter, admittedly, Expert Classification Committee and Anomalies Removal Committee had also gone into the matter and made distinction between them. Subsequently, nomenclature of all of them were removed and fused into one category, namely, Fitter. Nomenclature and fitment is one of executive policy of the Government. Unless the action is arbitrary or there is invidious discrimination between persons similarly situated, doing same type of work, as is pointed out, it would be difficult for the Courts to go into the question of equation of posts or fitment into a particular scale of pay. They must be left to be decided by the Expert Committees and Government. The Courts cannot go into them and evaluate the job criteria and scales of pay prescribed for each category. Under those circumstances, the Tribunal is justified in refusing to go into the question.

The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

SLP dismissed.

 

*******

Parallel Citations of other Journals :

Shiba Kumar Dutta v. Union of India, 1997(3) Supreme 517 : JT 1997(3) SC 453 : 1997(2) Scale 557

00025

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top