SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(P&H) 332

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
S.P.Kurdukar and Swatanter Kumar JJ.
Ram Rattan
Versus
State Of Haryana
Civil Writ Petition No. 520 of 1995,
Decided On : MARCH 2, 1995

Entitlement to equal pay for equal work under the Industrial Disputes Act based on completion of 240 days of service in a year.

Headnote:

Equal Pay - Industrial Disputes Act - The court directed the respondents to grant equal pay for equal work to the petitioners who had completed 240 days of service in a year as prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act. The court clarified that the relief was restricted to equal pay and did not include regularization.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought direction to the respondents for equal pay for equal work as they had completed 240 days of service in a year as prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners would be entitled to the same relief as granted in a previous case, but directed the respondents to verify the petitioners' claim and grant them the benefit accordingly. The court clarified that the relief was restricted to equal pay and did not include regularization.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to equal pay for equal work under the Industrial Disputes Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners would be entitled to equal pay for equal work if they had completed 240 days of service in a year as prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act. The court directed the respondents to verify the petitioners' claim and grant them the benefit accordingly.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction to grant equal pay for equal work to the petitioners who had completed 240 days of service in a year as prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act. The court clarified that the relief was restricted to equal pay and did not include regularization.

Judgment

Swatantar Kumar, J.

1. Admitted. Pleadings of the parties are complete. By consent, writ petition placed on board and called out for hearing.

2. 43 petitioners have approached this Court by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction to the respondents that since they have completed 240 days during a period of 12 calendar months as prescribed under Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of, Section 25(B) of Industrial Disputes Act 1947, they be granted same salary and allowances which are being granted to regular employees holding the same/similar posts. The petitioners are working on daily wages on different jobs. The petitioners, therefore, pray that the principle of equal pay for equal work be applied and they be paid pay and allowances admissible to them under the rules. In support of this contention, petitioners rely upon the decision of this Court in Ajmer and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., (C.W.P. No. 11175 of 1992, decided on December 2, 1993).

3. Mr. V.P. Gupta, Executive Engineer, P.W.D. filed a written statement on behalf of respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3., It is stated "they did not complete 240 days service continuously." , The substance of the written statement, is. that since the petitioners have not completed 240 days service in a year (calendar year), they are not entitled to the relief in terms of the judgment in Ajmer and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. (Supra).

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the petitioners would be entitled to the same relief which was granted to the petitioners in Ajmer and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. (Supra). However, the respondents will have to verify as to whether the petitioners have completed/actually worked for 12 calendar months preceding the date of filing this writ petition. If they have worked in terms of Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 25(B) of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, the petitioners in Ajmer and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. (Supra). Respondents to verify the claim of each petitioner in terms of the judgment of this Court in Ajmer and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. (Supra) and grant them the benefit in accordance therewith. It is further clarified that the relief in the present writ petition is restricted to only for equal pay for equal work and question of regularisation is not the subject matter of relief in this writ petition.

5. This writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. There is no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top