Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN
Sadou Axom Prathamik TET Uttirno Sikshak Samaj, Represented by its President, Sri Trailokya Deka – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Department of School Education (Elementary) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned Standing Counsel for the Elementary Education Department, being respondent Nos.1 - 3, Mr. S. Bora, learned standing counsel, SSA, appearing for the respondent No.4 and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel for Finance department, being respondent No. 5.
2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order, dated 01-09- 2022, issued under Memo No.PMA.52/2020/Pt./30-A by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Elementary Education Department and/or any other consequential order(s)/ action(s) and/ or to issue direction to the respondent authority to release the arrear 5% Dearness Allowance/ Dearness Relief from July, 2019 to December, 2021 and 11% & 3% Dearness Allowance/Dearness Relief from July, 2021 to August, 2022 payable to the members of the petitioner Association who have been working as Assistant Teacher in different Lower Primary/Upper Primary schools in the State of Assam.
Background Facts:-
3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under:-
“The member
The denial of arrears of Dearness Allowance to contractual teachers performing equal duties as regular teachers violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, asserting the principle of equal pay f....
Continuous service obligates salary payment despite appointment legality, and equal treatment demands non-discriminatory enforcement of employment rights.
The court established that the principle of equal pay for equal work does not apply rigidly when different qualifications and job responsibilities exist, and that the government has the discretion to....
The court emphasized the principle of equal pay for equal work and mandated reconsideration of petitioners' claims for regularization and pay, acknowledging their qualifications and similar duties co....
The fixed pay policy for Group-C and Group-D employees is constitutional, aimed at employment generation, and does not violate the principle of equal pay for equal work without proving equality in al....
Discrimination against contractual employees violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution when equal treatment is not provided in the application of benefits.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
