Back
2008(1) Supreme 232
Supreme Court of india
C.K. Thakker & D.K. Jain, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. — Appellant
versus
Dineshan K.K. — Respondent
Appeal (civil) 25 of 2008
Decided on 04.01.2008
Equal pay for equal work — Doctrine of — Applicability of — Principle of equal pay is dependent upon the nature of work done — It cannot be judged by the mere volume of work; there may be qualitative difference as regards reliability and responsibility — The functions may be the same but the responsibilities do make a difference — Judgment of administrative authorities, concerning responsibilities which attach to post, and degree of reliability expected of an incumbent, would be a value judgment of authorities concerned which, if arrived at bona fide, reasonably and rationally,is not open to interference by Court — Since said principle requires consideration of various dimensions of a given job, normally the applicability of this principle must be left to be evaluated and determined by an expert body and the Court should not interfere till it is satisfied that the necessary material on the basis whereof the claim is made is available on record with necessary proof and that there is equal work and equal quality and all other relevant factors are fulfilled.(Paras 9 to 13)
Facts of the case
1.Writ petition was filed by petitioner working in rank of a Radio Mechanic in Assam Rifles herein in the instant case on plea that Ministry of Home Affairs and Director General of Assam Rifles having accepted in principle that members of Assam Rifles, should be given same rank and pay structure as was given to other central paramilitary forces, yet same had been denied to them. Said petition was allowed by High Court directing that permission granted by Union of India, to re-designate rank of Havildar (Radio Mechanic) as Warrant Officer as recommended by Ministry of Home Affairs should be carried out and pay scale as admissible to their counterparts in the CRPF and the BSF should be granted from same date.
2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.
Findings of the Court-
Specific admission of petitioners that all paramilitary forces, including Assam Rifles were at par with each other and there was apparent disparity in pay scales of personnel of Assam Rifles with their counterparts in other central paramilitary forces. In order to rectify this disparity, Director General Assam Rifles, petitioner No.2 had, in fact taken up grievance of respondent with Ministry of Home Affairs, inter alia recommending re-designation of Havildar (RM) Gd.-I and II of Assam Rifles as Warrant Officer and for replacement of pay scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 to bring them at par with their counterparts in other central police organization.However, Ministry of Home Affairs while accepting said proposal recommended re-designation of HAV/RM as Warrant Officer but subject to condition that pre-revised and revised pay scales of HAV/RM in other paramilitary forces were identical to pay scales of Head Constable (RM) in CRFP and BSF.No attempt was made in counter affidavit to explain how case of the HAV/RM in Assam Rifles was different from that of Radio Mechanics in other central paramilitary forces-Short question requiring consideration was whether having admitted in their affidavit apparent disparity and anomaly in pay scales of Radio Mechanics, administrative authorities, could be permitted to perpetuate apparent discriminatory differentiation in pay scales because of disparity in pre-revised and revised scales of personnel of Assam Rifles prior to recommendations of Fourth Pay Commission, irrespective of the identity of their powers, duties and responsibilities with other paramilitary forces. In view of total absence of any plea on part of Union of India that Radio Mechanics in other paramilitary forces were performing different or more onerous duties as compared to the Radio Mechanics in Assam Rifles, the impugned decision of Government held clearly irrational and arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution.No infirmity was found in impugned directions given by High Court, warranting interference. Appeal having no merit was dismissed.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
judgment
D.K. Jain, J. —
1.Delay condoned.
2.Leave granted.
3. This appeal by the Union of India and the Director General of Assam Rifles arises out of the judgment and order dated 11th February, 2005 rendered by the Gauhati High Court in WP (C) No.497 of 2001. By the impugned order, while allowing the writ petition, directions have been issued that the permission granted by the Union of India vide its letter dated 3rd March, 1998, to re-designate the rank of Havildar (Radio Mechanic) as Warrant Officer as recommended by the Ministry of Home Affairs shall be carried out and the pay scale as admissible to their counterparts in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and the Border Security Force (BSF) shall be granted from the same date.
4.The nub of the grievance of the writ petitioner, working in the rank of a Radio Mechanic in the Assam Rifles was that the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Director General of Assam Rifles having accepted in principle that the members of the Assam Rifles, should be given the same rank and pay structure as was given to other central paramilitary forces, yet the same had been denied to them. It was pleaded that as the Ministry of Home Affairs had conveyed its decision to rationalize the rank structure of non gazetted personnel of central paramilitary forces vide order dated 26th January, 1998, equal pay structure in other ranks, including the Radio Mechanics in the Assam Rifles could not be denied. His further grievance was that after the implementation of the Fourth Pay Commission, the pay of the Havildar/GD and Head Constable/Radio Mechanic was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.975-1660, without any discrimination between the general duty and technical categories but the discrimination surfaced when higher pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 was given to the Radio Mechanics working in the BSF, denying the same pay scale to the Radio Mechanics in the Assam Rifles. It was also pointed out that the Radio Mechanics working in the Delhi Police organization had been given a much higher pay scale on 10th October, 1997 which was being denied to the similar rank holders in the Assam Rifles.
5.The writ petition was contested by the Union of India. In the counter affidavit filed on its behalf, it was stated that on the recommendation of the Fourth Pay Commission, with effect from 1st January, 1986, the Assam Rifles personnel had been granted revised pay scales and allowances entirely on the lines of other central paramilitary forces. However, as the changes in the rank structure were not carried out in the Assam Rifles like in other central paramilitary forces, an apparent disparity in the service conditions of certain category of personnel including the rank of Radio Mechanic had arisen. It was also pointed out that the Assam Rifles Directorate had brought this disparity to the notice of the Ministry of Home Affairs in February, 1998, and had recommended the re-designation of Radio Mechanic and Head Constable in Assam Rifles as Warrant Officer and for replacement of pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 to bring them at par with their counterparts in other central police organizations. It was stated that in response to the said ecommendation, the Ministry of Home Affairs vide letter dated 3rd March, 1998, had informed the Assam Rifles that they could re-designate the Head Constable (Radio Mechanic) as Warrant Officer provided their pre-revised and revised pay scales were identical to the pay scales of their counterparts in CRPF and BSF. However, the re-designation of the ranks could not be carried out in the light of the said communication as there was disparity between the pay scales of a Radio Mechanic in Assam Rifles and their counterparts in CRPF and BSF. It was conceded that though the academic qualification for recruitment to the post of Radio Mechanic in Assam Rifles as well as in CRPF and BSF was the same yet there was disparity in the revised pay scales between the Assam Rifles and the said two other paramilitary forces. The
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
