Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Roshan Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
1.The petitioners, by way of present petition, have prayed for the following substantive reliefs:
“(i) That the respondents may be directed to pay to the applicants salary in the scale of Rs.4400-7000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and Rs.1350-2400 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 with all consequential benefits.
(ii) That the respondents may also be directed to pay to the applicants the arrears due and admissible to them as a result of the relief at Sr. No.(i) above. They may also be directed to pay interest @18% per annum on the arrears of salary.”
2. The petitioners have averred in the petition that they are working as Laboratory Attendants with the respondents and are presently working at Government High Schools/Government Senior Secondary Schools/Government Colleges in the respondent Department. The post of Laboratory Attendant was re-designated as Senior Laboratory Attendant when the pay scales of Laboratory Attendants were revised on the Punjab pattern, and they were given the scale of Rs.950-1800 w.e.f. 01.01.1986. Further, the scale was revised to Rs.3120-5160 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and, at present, they are getting the salary in the said pay scale.
3. Vide memo dated 01.01.1990
The principle of equal pay for equal work under Articles 14 and 39(d) of the Constitution mandates that employees performing similar duties be compensated equally, regardless of title discrepancies.
Direct appointees entitled to pay parity with transferred employees and departmental counterparts performing identical duties, as unequal pay scales violate Articles 14/16; courts rectify arbitrary a....
The determination of pay scales is the exclusive domain of the state, and courts should only intervene in cases of constitutional violations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for establishing parity in pay scales based on comparative job evaluation and equation of posts, and the burden of proof on the pet....
The principle of equal pay for equal work does not entitle employees to claim parity in pay scales if their recruitment processes differ significantly.
The State of Himachal Pradesh is not mandated to follow pay scales set by another State; employer discretion in service conditions is reaffirmed.
Pay scales and post classification are executive's exclusive domain; courts refrain from equating posts absent grave error proof. Equal pay demands identical duties/responsibilities, not just qualifi....
The principle of equal pay for equal work requires proof of equivalent job functions; without adequate demonstration of such equality, claims for pay parity fail.
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
