The principle of equal pay for equal work should be applied by the appropriate government when there is complete and wholesale identity between the two groups, and not by the court.

The petitioners have come forward with these Writ Petitions praying for a direction to the respondents to fix their scale of pay on par with P.G. Teachers based on the principle of equal pay for equal work.

2. According to the petitioners, Higher Secondary Education was introduced in the year 1978 and it consists of two categories namely General stream and Vocational stream. In the General stream, the Higher Secondary Education comprises of Maths Group, Science Group and Arts Group and the Vocational stream of education comprises of six areas viz. Commerce and Business, Engineering and Technology, Agriculture, Home Science, Health and Miscellaneous. The minimum educational qualification prescribed for General stream is a Post Graduate degree in the subject concerned and a Bachelor degree in Education (B.Ed.). The further case of the petitioners is that the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.1719 dated 19. 1978, prescribing qualification for appointment of Vocational Instructors and also sanctioned the appointment to teach the students of above mentioned Vocational groups. It is also stated that for Commerce and Business Group, the Government prescribed Commerce degree as the qualification for the Vocational stream.

3. While that being so, at the time of introduction of Higher Secondary system, due to non-availability of required number of P.G. Teachers, the B.T. Assistants who were working in the Secondary Schools were inducted to teach subjects in the General Stream. Thereafter, those inducted Teachers were asked to undergo a part-time training course conducted by SCERT and they were also awarded Certificates and they were treated as equivalent to P.G. Assistants, whereas the Vocational Instructors who were initially appointed on part-time basis and they were not regularised. Thereafter, considering the representations submitted by the petitioners, the Government had taken a decision and about 800 Vocational Teachers were brought in the time scale of pay as per G.O.No.712 dated 25. 1990 and subsequently, 587 Vocational Teachers were also brought in time scale of pay vide G.O. 967 dated 110. 1992.

4. The petitioners who are also similarly placed Vocational Teachers, possessed with M.Com., degree with B.Ed., qualifications, initially appointed on 21.09.1984 and 18. 1985 respectively, were given time scale of pay as per G.O.No.967 dated 110. 1992 and they are now working under the fourth respondent School, handling Commerce, Accountancy, Auditing and Management Principles and Techinques for the Vocational Group. The petitioners claim that the syllabus for the subjects namely Commerce, Accountancy etc. are almost similar for both the students of General stream and Vocational stream. Further, the Vocational Teachers are required to take practical classes, maintenance and correction of records of the students in addition to theory classes. The fact that the Vocational Teachers are also having Masters Degree with B.Ed., qualifications and are handing classes in equal number of classes on par with that of the P.G.Assistants in the Schools was also noticed by the Government.

5. On the basis of the above similarities and the nature of work, the petitioners claim for fixation of equal pay on par with that of P.G. Teachers based on the principle of equal pay for equal work. It is also stated that the P.G. Teachers are given the scale of pay of Rs.6,500-200-10500 for handling classes for Commerce and Accountancy groups for the Higher Secondary Students and for the Vocational Teachers who are also handing classes for the Higher Secondary Students in Commerce, Accountancy, Auditing, Office Management are given only the scale of pay of Rs.5,500-175-9000/-. Therefore, the petitioners claim that they are also entitled to have the equal pay as that of the P.G. Assistants based on the principles enshrined under Articles, 14, 15, and 39(d) of the Constitution of India.

6. The third respondent has filed a common counter affidavit inter ali