1. Dispute regarding implementation of pay commission recommendations for employees absorbed from cooperative societies into service. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2018 Supreme(SC) 1042
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, JJ.
M.P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd. & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Uma Shankar Dwivedi – Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos. 9146-9148 of 2018 (Arising From SLP(C) Nos. 5285-5287 of 2016)
Decided On : 05-09-2018
Important Points
The main legal point established in the judgment is the clarification on the implementation of pay revision regulations, extension of benefits to specific employee societies, and the directive for the implementation of recommendations of the Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions and the payment of arrears within a specified timeframe.
Subject
Employment - Pay Revision and Employee Benefits
Act Referred
pay revision Regulations of 2001
Headnote
Fifth Pay Commission - Implementation of Pay Revision Regulations - Extension of Benefits to Employees of Rural Electrification Cooperative Societies - Clarification on Discrimination and Arrears Payment
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were questioned on whether they are bound to implement the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission in respect of the respondent/employees. The respondent belonged to a society where the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission had not been implemented, and the appellants extended the benefit to employees from societies where the benefit had been implemented.
Finding of the Court:
The court clarified that employees who have been absorbed shall be governed by the terms of absorption. It also emphasized that if the appellants had extended the benefit of the pay revision Regulations of 2001 to employees where the pre-revised pay scales had not been applied, the respondent/employees belonging to the specific society will not be discriminated. The court also directed the implementation of recommendations of the Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions and ordered the payment of any arrears within three months.
Issues: The main issue was the implementation of the Fifth Pay Commission recommendations and the extension of benefits to employees of specific societies, as well as the implementation of the Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions and the payment of arrears.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that employees who have been absorbed shall be governed by the terms of absorption and clarified that discrimination should not occur in the extension of benefits. It also directed the implementation of recommendations of the Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions and the payment of any arrears within three months.
Final Decision: The impugned orders were clarified, and the appeals were disposed of. Pending applications, if any, were also disposed of, and there were no orders as to costs.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appellants rely on absorption terms and exclusionary notifications; respondents contend that benefits were extended to similarly situated employees. (Para 2 , 3 )
3. Extension of pay revision benefits to some employees despite exclusionary notifications precludes the discrimination of other similarly situated employees. (Para 4 )
4. An employer cannot discriminate against a class of employees if benefits were extended to others in similar positions despite an exclusionary notification. (Para 4 )
5. Appeals disposed of with directions to extend pay revision benefits to prevent discrimination and grant subsequent pay commission benefits with arrears. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 )
6. Does the extension of pay benefits to some employees despite an exclusionary notification entitle other similarly situated employees to the same?
Yes, if an employer extends pay revision benefits to certain employees despite an exclusion in a notification, other employees in similar positions cannot be discriminated against. (Para 4 )
7. How should subsequent pay commission benefits be applied to absorbed employees?
Benefits of subsequent pay commissions should be extended to absorbed employees from the date such benefits were granted to the employer's regular employees. (Para 5 )
JUDGMENT :
Kurian, J.
Leave granted.
2. The moot question is whether the appellants are bound to implement the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission in respect of the respondent/employees. According to the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, the respondent belongs to Rewa Society, where the recommendations of Fifth Pay Commission had not been implemented and Appellant No.1 extended the benefit to the employees coming from those societies, where the benefit of Fifth Pay Commission had been implemented. There cannot be any dispute that the employees who have been absorbed shall be governed by the terms of absorption.
3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants invited our attention to the Notification dated 27.04.2006, wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the pay revision of 2001 of the appellant No.1 will not be applicable to employees of Rural Electrification Cooperative Societies absorbed in the service of Appellant No.1, to whom the prerevised pay scales were not applicable. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that despite such exclusion, the benefit has been extended to the employees of the societies where the pre-revised pay scales were not applicable.
4. We make it clear that in case Appellant No.1 has extended the benefit of the pay revision Regulations of 2001 , despite the exclusion in the Notification dated 27.04.2006, to those employees where the prerevised pay scales had not been applied, the respondent/employees belonging to the Rewa Society will not be discriminated.
5. As far as implementation of recommendations of Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions are concerned, there cannot be any dispute. The benefits will be extended to the employees of the REC Societies with effect from the date the benefits of the Sixth and Seventh Pay Commissions have been given to the employees of Appellant No.1. If there is any arrears to be paid in this regard, the same shall be paid within three months from today.
6. The impugned orders will stand clarified to the above extent and the appeals are disposed of.
7. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
8. There shall be no orders as to costs.
