Back
AMAN CHAUDHARY
Ramesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Aman Chaudhary, J.
The petitioners are before this Court for the removal of anomalies in their pay scale from the date it arose, i.e. 01.01.2006, instead of 01.01.2016.
2. Learned Senior counsel contended that the petitioners, appointed as Lab Technicians in the Health Department, Haryana, were granted the same pay scale as that of Radiographers, which continued to be the case until 2009, when that of the latter was made higher. The Pay Anomalies Commission (hereafter referred to as 'Commission') constituted to address the concerns regarding it, on 24.07.2015 recommended the same pay band to both categories. The Government upgraded the pay scale, though, w.e.f. 01.01.2016, without there being any justification for the anomaly not being removed from the date it began.
3. Opposing the above, learned State counsel submitted that it is the inherent power of the State Government to determine the scale of a post, which is done based on various criteria. Though incidentally the pay scales were identical prior to 01.01.2006, but the same were revised by the 6th Pay Commission thereon. However, after receiving the proposal of the Department and representation of the petitioners, a d
The State cannot impose arbitrary cut-off dates for pay scale revisions, violating the principles of equality under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The burden of proof for establishing pay parity lies with the employee claiming discrimination, and judicial review in pay matters is limited to unreasonable administrative actions.
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.
The determination of pay scales is the exclusive domain of the state, and courts should only intervene in cases of constitutional violations.
The main legal principle established is the requirement for parity in pay scale among similar cadre of employees, as mandated by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
It is well settled that normally the courts should not interfere with recommendations of an expert body, as it is exclusive domain of State to decide pay scales to be paid to a particular class/categ....
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....
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....
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
