Important Point
If the necessary material on the basis whereof the claim for parity of pay scale is made is available on record with necessary proof and there is equal work of equal quality and all other relevant factors are fulfilled ,then denial of parity in pay scale is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Headnote:Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Sections 7 and 7A – Parity of pay scales – Entitlement to – Writ petition by respondents presiding officers claiming parity with District Judges in matter of time scale as well as selection grade – Allowed by High Court – State Appeal thereagainst – No qualitative difference in nature of functions or duties attached to categories of posts – This parity having been recognised and accepted by the State Government for more than 30 years, the High Court, rightly observed that mere fact that Constitution refers to appointment of District Judges alone could not, by itself, be a good ground for treating the Presiding Officers of the Industrial Tribunal and the District Judges differently – The High Court held that even the Presiding Officers of the Industrial Tribunals were not outside ambit of Constitution as protection of rules framed under Article 309 as also under Article 311 was available to them – The action of the State Government in treating the officers presiding over the Industrial Tribunal differently from the District Judges in the matter of pay scales on its face was in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India – Looking to nature of duties and functions of respondents, held that there was no reason to treat them differently – Once these persons were already working for more than three decades discharging same functions and duties, no reason why same benefit should not be given to respondents and other similarly situated Presiding Officers of the Tribunal – No illegality, infirmity or error of jurisdiction found in Impugned judgment so as to warrant interference – Appeal having no merit dismissed. (Paras 10 to 15)
       Facts of the Case :
       1.Writ petition filed by respondents presiding officers claiming parity with District Judges in matter of time scale as well as selection grade was allowed by High Court herein in the instant case.
       2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.
       Findings of the Court :
       Looking to nature of duties and functions of respondents, held that there was no reason to treat them differently. Once these persons were already working for more than three decades discharging same functions and duties, no reason why same benefit should not be given to respondents and other similarly situated Presiding Officers of the Tribunal .No illegality, infirmity or error of jurisdiction found in Impugned judgment of High Court so as to warrant interference .Appeal having no merit was dismissed.
       Result : Appeal dismissed.

Judgment

Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. —

1.This appeal by the State of Kerala, arises out of the Judgment and Order dated 5th December, 2003, passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in O.P. No, 8947/03(M). By the impugned Order, while allowing the writ petition of the respondents herein, directions have been issued that Order at Exhibit P8 shall be modified so as to treat the writ petitioners at par with the District Judges in the matter of time scale as well as the selection grade and the needful should be done within three months from the date of the certified copy of the Judgment.

2.Facts, in brief leading to the filing of the present appeal are as follows:-

The respondents herein were the members of the Bar. In the year 1993, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were selected and appointed as Presiding Officers of the Industrial Tribunals whereas respondent No. 3 was selected and appointed as Presiding Officer in the year 1996 in the State of Kerala. They continued to work as such. The claim of the respondents in the writ petition was that prior to the year 1998, the State Government had granted to them pay scales at par with the District Judges. However, when Judicial Officers were granted benefit of revision of pay scales in December, 2001 with retrospective effect from March, 1996, similar benefit was denied to them. The respondents submitted a representation to the State Government seeking extension of the benefit of interim relief in terms of Order vide G.O. dated 30.5.1998 granting interim relief at the rate of 35% of pay as on 1.7.1996 to the members of the Subordinate Judiciary in the State. The said representation was decided and rejected vide Order dated 15.5.1999. On 25.11.1999, the respondents filed O.P. No. 20490 of 1999 in the High Court seeking direction to the State Government to grant interim relief at par with the District Judges. The said writ petition was allowed, with a direction to the State Government to issue necessary Orders in this regard by extending the benefit of interim relief at the rate of 35% (basic pay + D.A.) with effect from 1.1.1996 as directed in Exhibit P4 to the Judicial Officers. It was the case of the respondents before the High Court that the State Government on 18.4.2000 in pursuance of the directions of the High Court sanctioned interim relief to the Presiding Officers of the Industrial Tribunals as well. On 12.1.2001, Government of Kerala vide G.O.(MS) No. 231/2001/Home dated 12.12.2001 decided to grant the scales of pay to the members of Subordinate Judiciary as recommended by the National Judicial Commission (Shetty Commission). The respondents were denied the said benefits of the scales of pay and, accordingly, they submitted representation on 7.1.2002 to the Secretary to the Government, (Labour and Rehabilitation Department) requesting for the grant of same scales of pay as that of the District Judges in the State. A copy of the Order dated 4.2.2003 by which revision of pay was allowed to the District Judges was placed on the record of the High Court as Exhibit P8. By the impugned Order, the Presiding Officers (Industrial Tribunals) were granted the pay scale of Rs. 16,300-400-18,300/- with effect from March 1, 1997. However, the District Judges had been placed in the scale of Rs. 16,750-400-19,150-420-20,500/-. They also had been granted a selection grade of Rs. 18,750-400-19,150-450-20,500-500-23,850/-. The respondents complained that the action in treating them differently from the District Judges suffers from the vice of discrimination and arbitrariness. Thus, they sought the intervention of the High Court to quash Order - Exhibit P8 of the State Government and further direction to grant same scale of pay as has been sanctioned in the case of District Judges.

3.The writ petition was contested by the State. In the counter affidavit filed on its behalf by the Under Secretary, Department of Finance, it was inter alia stated that in the State of Kerala while the Presiding Officers of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2008 Supreme(SC) 965

2008(4) Supreme 609Supreme Court of indiaC.K. Thakker and Lokeshwar Singh Panta, JJ.State of Kerala — PetitionerversusB. Renjith Kumar & Ors. — RespondentsCivil Appeal No. 4104 of 2004Decided on : 5-06-08

Cases Referred (5)

2008(4) Supreme 609
Supreme Court of india
C.K. Thakker and Lokeshwar Singh Panta, JJ.
State of Kerala — Petitioner
versus
B. Renjith Kumar & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4104 of 2004
Decided on : 5-06-08