Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
State H.R.T.C Conductor Union, Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical pay parity between conductor and clerk disrupted temporarily in 2012 (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. pay parity requires equivalence in duties, qualifications, responsibilities (Para 5) |
Judgment :
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
Petitioner is a Union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 before the Registrar Trade Unions, Himachal Pradesh. It is seeking to espouse the cause of its members-the Conductors working in Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC)-respondent No.2, concerning anomaly in their pay-scale.
2. The case
Following facts are not in dispute:-
2(i) Respondent-HRTC came into existence on 02.10.1974. It framed Recruitment & Promotions Rules for its employees in the year 1976 and carried out amendments thereto from time to time in accordance with law. Post of Conductor in the respondent No.2-Corporation was in the pay-scale of Rs.110-200 prior to 01.01.1978 and in pay-scale of Rs. 400-600 as on 01.01.1978. The same was the pay- scale for the post of Clerk in the respondent No.2- Corporation. During third general revision of pay-scales, post of Conductor in respondent No.2-Corporation was assigned pay-scale of Rs.950-1800 with initial start of Rs.1000/- w.e.f
Courts may rectify pay scale anomaly between historically equivalent posts arising from irrational partial adoption of revision notifications, without job evaluation or equating duties.
State's selective deviation from followed pay pattern without objective justification, failing to reflect grade pay enhancement in basic pay and initial start, creates anomaly violating Articles 14 a....
The determination of pay scales is the exclusive domain of the state, and courts should only intervene in cases of constitutional violations.
The State of Himachal Pradesh is not mandated to follow pay scales set by another State; employer discretion in service conditions is reaffirmed.
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....
Arbitrariness is an anti-thesis of doctrine of equality envisaged under Article 14 of Constitution of India.
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.
Tribunal cannot grant higher promotional pay scale to one cadre's employees matching another distinct cadre's juniors by one-time parity, as it exceeds jurisdiction absent Article 14 violation from r....
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....
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
