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

2017 Supreme(Del) 1002

VALMIKI J.MEHTA
SANJEEV KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Pardeep Dahiya, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. B.K. Sood, Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Thukral, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek the application of doctrine of “equal pay for equal work” by treating the petitioners who are employees of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)/respondent nos.2 to 4 as to be similarly placed with the similar employees of Government of India and thus for petitioners to be paid the same pay-scales as granted to similarly placed central government employees.

2. Originally there were total of seven petitioners. Petitioner no.1 has not pressed the writ petition, and therefore, the writ petition has to be decided so far as petitioner nos.2 to 7 are concerned. These petitioner nos.2 to 7 were appointed by the employer/respondent nos.2 to 4, and they are working at the following posts:-

“(1) Pet. No.2

Junior Operator (Printing)

950-1500

1350-2200

(2) Pet. No.3

Offset Machine

950-1500

1350-2200

(3) Pet. No.4

Junior Op











































































































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top