Back
2004 Supreme(All) 2074
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Arun Tandon, J.
Ashok Kumar
Versus
State of U.P.
C.M.W.P. 27734 of 2002
Decided On : 10 November 2004
C. M. W. P. 27734 Of 2002
Piyush Shukla, RAJESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA,
The principle of equal pay for equal work was central to the court's decision, emphasizing that the petitioners, appointed as X-ray Technicians and discharging the duties of the post, should receive the salary admissible to the post of X-ray Technicians.
Headnote:
Dark Room Assistants - Salary Dispute - U.P. X-ray Technicians Service Rules, 1986 - [24th January, 1997, Government Order] - The court quashed the condition that the petitioners, appointed as X-ray Technicians, should be paid salary admissible to the post of Dark Room Assistants, citing it as arbitrary and in violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, initially appointed as Dark Room Assistants, were sent for training as X-ray Technicians and subsequently appointed as X-ray Technicians. However, they were denied the salary admissible to the post of X-ray Technicians and were paid the salary of Dark Room Assistants instead.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were appointed as X-ray Technicians and were discharging the duties and responsibilities of the post, yet were being paid the salary admissible to the post of Dark Room Assistants, which was deemed arbitrary and in violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Issues: The main issue was the refusal of the respondents to pay the petitioners the salary admissible to the post of X-ray Technicians, despite their appointment and performance of duties as X-ray Technicians.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the conditions mentioned in the order directing the petitioners to work as X-ray Technicians but be paid the salary admissible to the post of Dark Room Assistants were arbitrary and in violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Final Decision: The court quashed the condition mentioned in the order and directed the respondents to ensure that the payment of salary admissible to the post of X-ray Technicians is made to the petitioners from the date of their appointment, and their salary be re-fixed accordingly. The respondents were also directed to make the payment of salary with arrears within a period of two months.
( 1 ) HEARD Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Piyush shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
( 2 ) PETITIONERS, who are four in number were initially appointed as Dark Room Assistants under various Chief Medical Officers in the Health Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh for the period of 1986 to 1992. The petitioners have been working on their respective posts of Dark room Assistants in the prescribed pay-scale.
( 3 ) ON 24th January, 1997, the Director General, Medical and Health, U. P. Lucknow, respondent no. 2 with reference to the Government Order dated 29th February, 1988 issued a circular whereby it was provided that 25% posts of X-ray Technicians may be filled up by appointing the dark Room Assistants after they had completed the training of X-ray Technician. In the said circular the qualifications for being sent for training as X-ray Technicians were also specified. The mimimum qualifying service for the said purpose was fixed as five years. Under the aforesaid Government Order, it was provided that if the selected candidates complete their training of X-ray Technicians successfully, they shall be appointed against the vacant posts of x-ray Technicians in the pay-scale of Rs. 1350-2000 (as was then applicable ). For the purposes of selections of suitable Dark Room Assistants for being sent for training of X-ray Technicians, a selection committee was constituted and the said selection committee found the petitioners to be suitable for being sent for training at Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad.
( 4 ) THE candidates like the petitioners, who successfully completed the training of X-ray technicians, an order dated 28th June, 2001 was issued by the Director General, Medical and health, U. P. , Lucknow, respondent No. 2 appointing the aforesaid persons in various hospitals/dispensaries/health Centres situated throughout the State of Uttar Pradesh. Under the aforesaid order the petitioners have been appointed as X-ray Technicians under the Chief medical Officers, situate at Pratapgarh, Varanasi, Mahoba and Sonebhadra respectively. The petitioners joined at their respective places in pursuance of the aforesaid order and have been continuously working on the post of X-ray Technicians as their respective places since July 2001. Despite work of X-ray Technicians having been taken from the petitioners, they have been refused salary in the pay scale admissible to the posts of X-ray Technicians only on the ground that under order dated 28th June, 2001 referred to above, it was directed that the successful candidates like petitioners, shall work on the post of X-ray Technicians, but they shall be paid their salary admissible to the post of Dark Room Assistant only. The petitioners, as such, have approached this Court by means of the present writ petition for quashing the condition as mentioned in the order dated 28th June, 2001 with a further directions upon the Director General to pay salary to the petitioners admissible to the posts of X-ray Technicians, work whereof is being taken from the petitioners.
( 5 ) THIS Court, while entertaining the present writ petition on 19th July, 2002 issued an interim mandamus commanding the respondent-State authorities to fix the salary of the petitioners in the pay-scale applicable to X-ray Technicians or to show cause. In compliance of the order of this court dated 19th July, 2002 respondents have shown cause by filing a counter affidavit and in paragraph 6 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that petitioners are not entitled to the salary of the post of X-ray Technicians inasmuch as necessary amendments in the provisions of U. P. X-ray Technicians Service Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Rule of 1986) have not yet been made providing for promotion of Dark Room Assistant to the extent of 25% as was provided under Government Order dated 24th January, 1997 and, therefore, in absence of the amended R
