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

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1294

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIKHIL S. KARIEL, J.
Shwetaben Kanubhai Modh and Another - Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat and Others - Respondents
Special Civil Application Nos. 10106, 10242 of 2025, Special Civil Application Nos. 14113, 14206, 14282, 15194, 15247, 15549 of 2024, Special Civil Application No. 2619 of 2022
Decided On : 01-08-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : M.B. Parikh
For the Respondents: Nirali Sarda, Aditya Pathak, Tanushree Shrimal, Mitul Gautam, M.P. Prajapati

The entitlement to equal pay for equal work prevails, and the Government Resolution does not justify withholding arrears based on the availability of promotional posts.

Headnote:(A) Government Resolution dated 12.10.2022 - The petitioners seek to quash inaction of respondent authorities regarding grant of higher pay scales and arrears based on discriminatory practices of unequal pay for similar positions. (Paras 5-13)

(B) The constitutional right to equal pay for equal work is emphasized, focusing on the applicability of the Government Resolution providing higher pay scale to all Primary Teachers irrespective of promotional posts, ensuring equitable treatment. (Paras 7-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, Primary Teachers, argued discrimination by being denied the first higher pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 awarded to their counterparts in Municipal Corporations. The court had previously ruled on related grievances in a resolution dated 20.02.2024, which had not been fully implemented. (Paras 6-8)

Findings of Court:
The court clarifies that the Government Resolution does not limit payments based on the availability of promotional posts, hence the state's objections raised were rejected. The petitioners are entitled to receive arrears for the higher pay scale from the date of entitlement until the resolution date. (Paras 10-13)

Issues: Whether the state was justified in restricting the grant of higher pay-scale benefits and withholding payment of arrears based on the existence of promotional posts.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Government Resolution aimed to address pay scale discrepancies among Primary Teachers, and the state cannot restrict entitlement based on availability of a promotional post, affirming the right to equal pay.

Result: The petition is allowed, and the Government Resolution dated 12.10.2022 regarding the restriction on arrears is interfered with.

Table of Content
1. overview of case proceedings and requests (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. petitioners seek rectification of pay disparities (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's reasoning on pay scale amendments (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. arguments on implementation and delay in payment (Para 11 , 12)

ORDER :

Special Civil Application No. 15549 /2024:

At the request of learned advocate, permission to amend the cause title in so far as correcting the names of petitioner Nos.18, 24 and 33 is granted. Appropriate amendment to be carried out right away.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. M.B. Parikh for the petitioners and learned AGP Ms. Nirali Sarda for the respondent Nos.1 and 2

2. Since the issue raised in the present petitions are identical and since the arguments of learned advocate are also the same in all the matters, with the consent of learned advocates for the petitioners, are taken up for final disposal jointly.

3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

4. Special Civil Application No.10106 of 2025 is taken up as the lead petition for the purpose of appreciating the facts:

5. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:

“(A) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and or any other appropriate writ order of direction quashing and setting aside the inaction on the part of the respondent authority and further be pleased to direct them to pay the arrears upon revision as First (1st) higher pay scale at the rate of Rs.5000-150-8000/- as well as the 2nd and 3rd higher grade of pay scale and the grade pay @ of Rs.4200/- including all the consequential benefits as per 6th pay and also grant benefits under the 7th (Seven Pay Commission) as per the order dated 20/02/2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court (Annex. C) Your Lordships further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all the consequential benefits available under the law namely granting second and third higher pay scale after completion of 20 and 31 years of service as it was granted by this Hon’ble Court in various decisions (Annex.C).

(B) Pending admission, hearing and till final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships be pleased to direct the respondents herein to pay the arrears upon revision as per First (1st) higher pay scale at the rate of Rs.5000-150-8000 as well as the 2nd and 3rd higher grade of the pay scale and the grade pay @ of Rs.4200/- including all the consequential benefits as per 6th pay and also grant benefits under the 7th (Seven Pay Commission) as per (Annex.C), Your Lordships further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all the consequential benefits available under the law namely granting second and third higher pay scale after completion of 20 and 31 years of service, as it was granted by this Hon’ble Court in various decisions (Annex.C).

(C) Be pleased to grant such other and further relief/s may be deemed fit in the interest of justice.”

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners had been appointed as Primary Teachers in the school run under the administrative officer of the District Primary Education Committee and whereas they had claimed discrimination as regards teachers under the Municipal Corporations and District Panchayats being paid their first higher grade in the scale of Rs.5000 - 8000 as per Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994, upon completion of 9 years in the department where the teacher like the petitioners were not included for being conferred with the said benefits. It appears that the grievance of the petitioners having been partly assuaged by a Resolution dated 12.10.2022, the remaining portion of the grievance was with regard to non-grant of arrears and whereas the said issue had been decided by this Court in Special Civil Application No.4368 of 2020 and allied cases vide decision dated 20.02.2024. It would appear that the case of the petitioners being that the petitioners are identically situated to the petit

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