The court determined that pay disparities among public sector enterprises are justifiable due to differences in organizational structures and financial viability, reaffirming the principle of equal pay for equal work within context-specific frameworks.

JUDGMENT :

RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.

1. Heard learned counsels for the both the parties.

2. The present writ petition is preferred by the petitioners who are the employees of Manganese Ore (India) Limited (for short “MOIL”) who claim that they are entitled for pay as made applicable to other Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs), out of which, MOIL is one. The prayers are also made in this petition that the pay anomaly of the petitioners’ pay vis-a-vis Executives of other Central Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs) under the Ministry of Steel such as SAIL, KIOCL, NMDC etc. amounts to discrimination and thus violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The other consequential prayers are also made including a request to set aside the Minutes of Meeting held by the Board of Directors of MOIL on 27/09/2023. Various other prayers for direction to pay arrears of salary after upgradation of pay scales from 1/1/2017 are made.

3. In short, what lies at the heart of the petition is the issue regarding grant of pay parity.

Case of petitioners:-

4. The respondent no. 3 - MOIL is a Central Public Center Undertakings, and according to the petitioners, at present, the Government of India holds 53.84% shares while the Government of Maharashtra and Government of Madhya Pradesh hold 5.11% and 5.40% shares respectively. The remaining 35.65% shares are held by the Public.

5. Initially, the 1^st Pay Revision Commission was made applicable to the employees of MOIL, base of which, was a report of the Commission under Chairmanship of Justice S. Mohan for recommendation of revision of pay and allowances for board level and below board level employees working in CPSUs. On 30/8/2000, respondent no. 1 had communicated its no objection to respondent no. 3 to implement the said pay scale. Although it was approved by respondent starting with EO Grade in pay scale of 6550-200-11350 and onwards, respondent no. 3 applied the pay scale of 6550-200-11350 to employees in E1 Grade. Consequently, all the employees falling in Grade E0 to E9 were placed in lesser pay scale as compared to employees of other CPSUs falling in the same grade. The last revision of scale of pay for board level and below board level employees as well as non-unionized supervisors in CPSEs was made effective from 1/1/1997 for a period of 10 years.

6. The revision of second pay was done as per the recommendation given by the Commission established under the Chairmanship of Justice M. Jagannadha Rao, Retired Judge of the Hon’ble Apex Court and vide Office Memorandum dated 26/11/2008 submitted by the respondent no. 2, the respondent no. 3 issued Office Order dated 22/10/2009, by which, pay scale of below board level employees was revised.

7. It is the case of the petitioners that they had made several representations to the respondent authorities requesting to extend the same pay scale at par with employees of other CPSUs. The petitioners in order to justify their claim also requested the respondent authorities to look into the law laid down in a similar situation by the Karnataka High Court in Writ Petition No. 50434/2004 and by the Calcutta High Court in Writ Petition No. 12360/2008.

8. After submitting more than 5 representations, on 3/8/2017, respondent no. 2 - Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises issued Office Memorandum informing that the last pay revision was made effective from 1/1/2007 for a period of 10 years and as the next pay revision became due, the Government of India had set up 3^rd Pay Revision Commission under the Chairmanship of Justice Satish Chandra. On the basis of Office Memorandum dated 3