Back
B. R. SARANGI, G. SATAPATHY
Laxmidhar Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J. - The Petitioner, who was working as Salaried Amin under the District Judge, Cuttack (re- engaged after superannuation), has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the letter no.4009 dated 12.05.2014, as at Annexure-6, by which the Government of Orissa in Law Department observed that the Salaried Amins and Drivers of Subordinate Judiciary are not entitled to get one increment in pursuance of Law Department Resolution No. 10077/L dated 13.09.2012. The petitioner also seeks to quash the order dated 26.05.2017 at Annexure-11 rejecting the representation filed by All Orissa Judicial Employees Association regarding giving benefit of one advance increment to the Salaried Amins working in the Subordinate Judiciary, and to hold that the petitioner is entitled to get one advance increment like other staff in the ministerial cadre of the Subordinate Judiciary and accordingly his pension/family pension is to be processed and released within a stipulated time. The petitioner also further prayed to direct the opposite parties not to recover the amount paid to him by grant of one advance increment.
2. The genesis of the case revolves around the fact that this High
The withdrawal of benefits without complying with the principle of natural justice is void, and the court emphasized the recommendation made by the High Court and the Justice Shetty Commission.
The court affirmed the principle of equal treatment under Article 14, ordering the extension of retroactive pay benefits to applicants similar to counterparts in other departments.
An employee need not wait for twelve months from the fixation of his/her pay in the new scale for earning in the revised scale.
Equal pay for equal work mandates uniform application of benefits across similarly situated employees, reinforcing that arbitrary denial of pay parity violates constitutional principles.
Tribunal upheld employees' entitlement to retrospective pay fixation from 1996, emphasizing equality under law for similarly situated individuals.
Court emphasizes equal treatment and fair pay for similarly situated employees under the law, allowing notional pay fixation from 1996.
Employees similarly situated must receive equitable treatment regarding pay fixation as per Article 14, emphasizing uniform application of benefits.
The tribunal affirmed that similar employees' pay should be upgraded equally, addressing violations of equality in pay scales and ensuring equitable treatment among all central government employees.
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
