Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, BUDI HABUNG
State of AP – Appellant
Versus
Yabi Mindo And Ors. D/o Lt. Taba Mindo – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
(S. K. Medhi, J.)
The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 10.08.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 33 (AP) of 2021.
2. The facts, as projected in the writ petition instituted by the present respondents as writ petitioners are that they were Casual employees of the Public Health Engineering and Water Supply Department in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. They were appointed during the period from 1996 to 2007 and were continuing in their services. Their prayer for regularisation of service was not acceded to. It was contended that though they were categorised as Contingent Staff, they were working as regular LDCs. It was also stated that some of the petitioners were working like regular LDC/typists but were not being paid equal wages as compared to ad hoc/regular LDCs. The petitioners had also challenged the appointments of respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in the writ petition, whom the petitioners allege to be junior to them and were, however, regularised in their services.
3. On the said backdrop, the writ petition was filed. The writ petition was contested by the State as well as by the private respondents and the claims were refuted.
4. The Hon’ble Sin
The court affirmed that casual workers are entitled to the minimum of the pay scale for their roles based on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', as established in relevant Supreme Court ruli....
Point of Law : Principle of “equal pay for equal work” has also been extended to temporary employees (differently described as work-charge, daily wage, casual, ad hoc, contractual, and the like)
In determining equality of functions and responsibilities, under principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’, it is necessary to keep in mind, that duties of two posts should be of equal sensitivity, and....
The principle of equal pay for equal work mandates that employees performing identical duties must receive the same remuneration, regardless of their employment status.
The principle of equal pay for equal work mandates that employees performing similar duties must receive the same remuneration, regardless of their employment status.
Temporary employees performing the same duties as regular employees are entitled to minimum wages as per the equal pay principle, asserting their right to equitable treatment.
The court upheld that fixed pay contingency employees do not qualify for regularization under work-charged employee policies, emphasizing the need for adherence to established criteria.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of equal pay for equal work, which applies to temporary employees and prohibits the denial of pay parity to employees performing the ....
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
