IMPORTANT POINT
The principle of equal pay for equal work mandates that employees performing identical duties must receive the same remuneration, regardless of their employment status.

JUDGMENT :

(KAKHETO SEMA, J.)

Heard Mr. Supongwati Walling, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. B. Kithan, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the State respondents to grant the minimum scale of pay to the petitioner in the light of the judgment dated 26/10/2016 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Others -versus- Jagjit Singh & Others, reported in 2017 (1) GLT (SC) 47.

3. That by the order dated 03/07/1991, the petitioner was appointed as W/C Semi Skilled Labour in the Office of the Executive Engineer (PWD), Aboi Division, Aboi, Nagaland. The petitioner is continuously serving the department for about 31 years without any break in service and is presently paid the revised fixed pay of Rs. 6000/- p.m.

4. That the petitioner submitted the application dated 23/06/2022 to the Chief Engineer, Road & Bridges, NPWD, Nagaland, Kohima, for granting the scale of pay. The application submitted by the petitioner has however not evoke any response, hence the present petition.

5. Mr. Supongwati Walling, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is performing the same works and duties as any other regular W/C employees and/or the work-charged employees in the department who are getting the scale of pay but whose service are yet to be regularised, but the petitioner has been discriminated by the respondents by only paying a meagre fixed pay of Rs. 6000/- p.m inspite of the petitioner continuously serving the department for about 31 years. It is also submitted that the petitioner is now on the verge of retirement.

6. Mr. Supongwati Walling has also taken this Court to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioner and has referred to the information dated 09/08/2023 furnished by the department under the RTI Act, 2005 to show that in between the year 2000 to 2023, 723(seven hundred twenty three) fixed pay W/C employees has been granted the scale of pay by the respondents. Mr. Supongwati has further referred to the information furnished by the Executive Engineer PWD (R&B), Aboi Division under the RTI Act to show that the nature and duties of work performed by the fixed pay W/C employees, scale pay W/C employees (whose service are not regularised) and the regular W/C employees are same and identical. The learned counsel accordingly submits that the State respondents cannot adopt a pick and choose policy for granting the scale of pay to the similarly situated work-charged employees in the department when all the work-charged employees in the department perform the same nature of works, duties and responsibilities.

7. Ms. B. Kithan, the learned Government Advocate, on the other hand, has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to receive the minimum scale of pay as the State Government has not adopted any policy for granting scale of pay to W/C fixed pay employees as such an exercise will involve huge financial implications. It is further submitted that the petitioner fully knowing the nature of the appointment has accepted the appointment and therefore, serving the department for more than 31 years does not give any right to the petitioner for claiming the scale of pay. It is also submitted that the Government has constituted a high level committee by the notification dated 16/02/2024 to formulate a suitable policy for regulation of pay, remuneration and conditions of service of contingency and fixed pay employees in the department and therefore, the Government may be allowed some more time to finalise the policy.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

9. The petitioner is continuously in the service of the department for about 31 years and is presently paid the revised fixed pay of Rs. 6000/- p.m.

10. This Court has perused the information dated 09