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

2021 Supreme(Bom) 1393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Sadhana S. Jadhav, Surendra P. Tavade, JJ.
Pandurang B. Surve & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 7482 of 2017
Decided On : 26-10-2021

Advocates appeared:
G.S. Godbole, Advocate, Mustafa Shabbir Shamim, Advocate, Drupad Sopan Patil, Advocate, Rajesh Sudhakar Datar, Advocate, S.B. Kalel, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' and the lack of reasonable basis for treating the Petitioners differently in matters of payment of salary and Grade Pay with the Registrar of City Civil Court.

Headnote:

Pay Parity - Writ Petition - Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1882, Civil Manuel 1986, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948 - Section 6, 8, 13, 14, 34, 35, 36 - The court found that the Petitioners were entitled to equal pay as that of Registrar and Additional Registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai. The court issued a Writ of Certiorari to quash and set aside the Communication dated 24.7.2015, declared the Petitioners entitled for equal pay, and issued a Writ of Mandamus to modify and revise the Pay Band/Pay Scale of the Petitioners in conformity with the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commissions and applicable Service Rules for their posts with retrospective effect from 21st August, 1999.

Fact of the Case:

The Petitioners, officiating as Registrars and Additional Registrars in the Court of Small Causes (Small Causes Court at Mumbai), sought a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside a communication denying them the pay scale of 15600-39100 with Grade Pay 6600. They argued that their duties and responsibilities were at par with the Registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai, and therefore, they were entitled to pay parity.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Petitioners were entitled to equal pay as that of Registrar and Additional Registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai. The court issued a Writ of Certiorari to quash and set aside the Communication dated 24.7.2015, declared the Petitioners entitled for equal pay, and issued a Writ of Mandamus to modify and revise the Pay Band/Pay Scale of the Petitioners in conformity with the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commissions and applicable Service Rules for their posts with retrospective effect from 21st August, 1999.

Issues: The main issues were whether the post of the Petitioners is equivalent to the post of Registrar of the District Court or the registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai, and whether pay parity between the post of Registrar of District Courts and Registrar of Court of Small Causes, Mumbai is justifiable, although they are classified as Class II and Class I respectively.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Petitioners were entitled to equal pay as that of Registrar and Additional Registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai, based on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' and the lack of reasonable basis for treating them differently in matters of payment of salary and Grade Pay with the Registrar of City Civil Court.

Final Decision: The Writ Petition was made absolute, quashing and setting aside the Communication dated 24.7.2015, declaring the Petitioners entitled for equal pay, and issuing a Writ of Mandamus to modify and revise the Pay Band/Pay Scale of the Petitioners in conformity with the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commissions and applicable Service Rules for their posts with retrospective effect from 21st August, 1999.

JUDGMENT

Sadhana S. Jadhav, J. - Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well Respondents.

2 Rule. Rule returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties.

3 The Petitioner Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are officiating as Registrars and Additional Registrars in the Court of Small Causes (Small Causes Court at Mumbai). By this petition, the Petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorari thereby seeking the relief of quashing and setting aside the communication dated 24th July, 2015 by Additional Secretary, State of Maharashtra to the Registrar (Inspection-I), High Court of Bombay, thereby holding that the post of Registrar and Additional Registrar of City Civil and Sessions Court Mumbai is not equivalent to the post of Registrar and Additional Registrar, Small Causes Court, Mumbai and therefore, the Registrars and Additional Registrars are not entitled to the pay scale of 15600-39100 with Grade Pay 6600. It is further stated in the said communication that Registrar and Additional Registrar of Small Causes Court, Mumbai fall in A-Category. The said fact is self-speaking and therefore, the Registrar (Inspection-I) was directed to send a proposal for continuation of their pay scale in the category of 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 5000/-.

4 The substantive relief sought by the Petitioners is to modify and revise the pay scale and pay-band in conformity with the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission and High Power Pay Anomaly Committee Report, in addition to the recommendation by the Honble the Chief Justice, High Court, Mumbai through Registrar General and Guardian Judges of the Small Causes Court with retrospective effect from August, 1999.

5 The back drop of this issue is that a study group was constituted under the Chairmanship of Justice S.N. Khatri for the purpose of restructuring the organizational set up in subordinate Courts. One of the recommendations of the Committee was that the pay scale of the staff of the Court of Small Causes, Bombay shall be at par with the scale of the staff of City Civil and Sessions Court Bombay. The Registrars and Additional Registrars were classified as Class-I Gazetted Officer. By a letter dated 21st August, 1999, the Government of Maharashtra had communicated to the Registrar (Appellate Side), High Court that the said recommendations of the study group are accepted by the Government.

6 In addition, the Government had constituted a High Power Pay Anomaly Committee vide Notification dated 16/12/1998. The Committee had submitted its report on 29/12/1999 and clarified that the recommendations of study group and reports are accepted and the Government shall take necessary steps to implement the recommendations of the study group.

7 The Petitioners had made a representation to the Remembrancer of the Legal Affairs (RLA), Law and Judiciary Department, Government of Maharashtra seeking the relief of pay parity and to place them in the pay band of 15600-39100 with Grade Pay 6600 instead of 9300-34800 with Grade Pay 4600. The representation was supported by the Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai vide letter dated 16/7/2009. This was then followed by a reminder dated 20th October, 2010 by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Mumbai. It was a request to the Under secretary, Law and Judiciary Department to take appropriate steps in the said direction.

8 The Respondent-State had accepted the recommendations of the Shetty Commission vide Government Resolution dated 20/10/2011 and the pay scale of the Registrars of City Civil and Sessions Court as well as District Court were enhanced. It is the grievance of the Petitioners that although the post of Registrars, District Court is classified as Class-II post, they were drawing the salary in the pay band of 8000-275-13500 as per the recommendations of the Shetty Commission. The said pay is enhanced in the 6th pay Commission to 9300-34800 with Gr

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