IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Namit Kumar, J.
Jatinder Pal Singh and others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others - Respondents
CWP No. 16709, 17293, 18137, 14794, 16814 of 2017
Decided On : 06-02-2024
Anomaly in Pay-Scales - Punjab Mandi Board - 6th Pay Commission - 10300-34800+3800, 10300-34800+4400, 10300-34800+3200, 10300-34800+3600 - The court dismissed the petition seeking pay parity for the posts of Mandi Supervisors with Senior Assistants and Auction Recorders with Junior Assistants, citing lack of evidence and conscious decision of the government. The court emphasized the need for establishing parity in pay scales based on comparative job evaluation and equation of posts, and highlighted the burden of proof on the petitioners to establish such parity.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to take a final decision on a letter dated 04.02.2016, which sought approval for the removal of anomalies in the pay-scales of officers/officials of the Mandi Board. The petitioners claimed that prior to 01.12.2011, the pay-scales of Mandi Supervisors and Auction Recorders were at par with Senior Assistants and Junior Assistants, but after a revision of pay-scales, an anomaly was created.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the relief sought by the petitioners had already been granted, as a final decision had been taken by the government and the petitioners had been placed in the Grade Pay equivalent to the posts of Senior Assistants and Junior Assistants. The court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the lack of evidence and conscious decision of the government to equate the posts.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to the same Grade Pay as Senior Assistants and Junior Assistants for the intervening period from 01.12.2011 to 31.12.2015, based on the principle of parity in pay scales.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the burden of proof in establishing parity in pay scales and nature of duties and responsibilities was on the petitioners, and emphasized the need for comparative job evaluation and equation of posts to establish such parity. The court highlighted the lack of evidence and conscious decision of the government to equate the posts, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, stating that the relief sought by the petitioners had already been granted, and emphasized the lack of evidence and conscious decision of the government to equate the posts, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
JUDGMENT :
NAMIT KUMAR J.
1. This judgment shall dispose of CWP Nos.16709, 17293, 18137, 14794 and 16814 of 2017, as common questions of law and fact are involved for adjudication. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken from CWP No.16709 of 2017.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner(s) invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents No.1 to 3 to take a final decision on letter dated 04.02.2016 (Annexure P-2), whereby the approval has been granted by the Board of Directors in the meeting held on 11.01.2016, whereby it was approved to send the case of pay-scale of officers/officials of different categories, for removal of anomalies in their pay-scales, as per the details given in agenda Item No.2 and it was requested that approval may be given to remove the anomalies in the pay-scales of officers/officials of the Mandi Board.
3. Brief facts, as have been pleaded by the petitioners in the present writ petition, are that the petitioners are employees of Punjab Mandi Board Market Committees and are working as Mandi Supervisors-cum-Fee Collectors and Auction Recorders. The case set up by the petitioners in the writ petition is that prior to 01.12.2011, the pay-scales of Mandi Supervisors were at par with Senior Assistants and similar was the position with regard to the post of Auction Recorders, whose pay-scale was also same as that of Junior Assistants and whereas w.e.f. 01.12.2011, after revision of pay-scales, anomaly has been created and the Senior Assistants have been placed in a higher Grade Pay of Rs.4400/- than that of Mandi Supervisors and similarly, Junior Assistants have been placed in a higher Grade Pay than that of Auction Recorders. The comparative chart with regard to above posts reproduced in the writ petition(s), showing their pay-scales and grade pay is reproduced, which reads as under:-
| Name of posts | 1986 | 1996 | 2006 | From 1.12.2011 |
| Mandi Supervisor-cum- Fee Collector | Rs.1800-3200 | Rs.5800-9200 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3800 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3800 |
| Senior Assistant | Rs.1800-3200 | Rs.5800-9200 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3800 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.4400 |
| Name of posts | 1986 | 1996 | 2006 | From 1.12.2011 |
| Auction Recorder | Rs.1200-2100 | Rs.5000-8100 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3200 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3200 |
| Junior Assistant | Post was not in existence | Rs.4400-7000 | Rs.5900-20200+Grade Pay Rs.2800 | Rs.10300- 34800+Grade Pay Rs.3600 |
4. It has been further averred that the said anomaly has been crept in for the reason that since there is no post of Mandi Supervisor and Auction Recorder in the State of Punjab, therefore, the Notification dated 01.12.2011, is silent about these two posts and since there was an anomaly, therefore, the matter was taken up by the Punjab Mandi Board in the meeting of Board of Directors, held on 11.01.2016, whereby it was approved to send the case of pay-scales of officers/officials of different categories, for removal of anomalies in the pay-scales, as per the details given in agenda Item No.2 and it was requested that approval may be given to remove the anomaly in the pay-scales of officers/officials of the Mandi Board and since no action was taken by the respondent/State, therefore, the State President of Punjab Market Committee Employees Union sent a legal notice dated 11.05.2016, to the respondents for enhancing the Grade Pay of Mandi Supervisors and Auction Recorders. However, no action has been taken by the respondents, therefore, the instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners and a writ in the nature of mandamus, has been sought for directing the respondents to take a final decision on letter dated 04.02.2016 (Annexure P-2).
5. On issuance of notice of motion, separate replies have been filed by respondent No.1/State and respondent N
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited vs Rajesh Kumar and others
Govt. of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy and Others
Hukum Chand Gupta v. Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research and Others
Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Workmen, Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Kshetriya Kisan Gramin Bank v. D.B. Sharma and Others
S.C. Chandra and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Others
State of Haryana and Others v. Charanjit Singh and Others
State of U.P. and Others v. J.P. Chaurasia and Others
State of West Bengal and another vs. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association and others
Steel Authority of India Limited and Others v. Dibyendu Bhattacharya
Union of India and Another v. Manik Lal Banerjee
Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh and Others v. Manju Mathur and Another
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' is not strictly applied; disparities based on recruitment methods and job responsibilities justify differences in pay.
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 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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.