HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
Sanjib Banerjee, Wanlura Diengdoh, J.
Jalesh Kumar & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
WP (C) No. 352/2021
Decided On : 25-04-2022
Anomaly - Pay Disparity for Assistants in Assam Rifles - Third Central Pay Commission, Fourth CPC, Fifth CPC - The court discussed the historical disparity in pay-scales for Assistants in Assam Rifles compared to other Central paramilitary forces, the recommendations made by the Director-General of Assam Rifles, and the Union Home Ministry's responses. The court emphasized the principle of equal pay for equal work and the absence of any distinction in the duties and responsibilities of Assistants in Assam Rifles and other paramilitary forces.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the pay-scale offered to Assistants in Assam Rifles compared to other Central paramilitary forces. The petitioners sought parity in pay and emoluments, arguing that the duties and responsibilities of Assistants across the Central paramilitary forces were equal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was historical disparity in the pay-scales for Assistants in Assam Rifles compared to other Central paramilitary forces. It emphasized the principle of equal pay for equal work and noted that the duties and responsibilities of Assistants in Assam Rifles were not different from those in other paramilitary forces.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Assistants in Assam Rifles were entitled to parity in pay with similar employees in other Central paramilitary forces.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle of equal pay for equal work and emphasized that there was no distinction in the duties and responsibilities of Assistants in Assam Rifles compared to other paramilitary forces. It also highlighted the historical disparity in pay-scales and the recommendations made by the Director-General of Assam Rifles.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, setting aside the judgment of the Tribunal and directing that the benefit of parity in pay should be extended to all Assistants in Assam Rifles, whether serving or retired, from March 30, 2005. The court rejected the Union's suggestion to confine the benefit to only two petitioners, stating that the entitlement applied to all Assistants in Assam Rifles as a class.
JUDGMENT
Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. - The matter pertains to the perceived anomaly in the pay-scale offered to the Assistants, who occupy a civilian post in the Assam Rifles. There is no dispute that since 2008 all posts in Assam Rifles and other Central paramilitary organisations have been combatised and the civilian cadre of Assistants in Assam Rifles will die out in the next few years.
2. The present writ petition arises out of an order of December 21, 2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench on a petition of several persons who occupied the post of Assistant in Assam Rifles. The principal case carried out to the Tribunal was that since the duties and responsibilities of Assistants across the Central paramilitary forces were equal, there ought not to be any disparity in the pay and emoluments between persons in the Assistant cadre in one Central paramilitary organisations and the members in the similar cadre in another.
3. This is the second round of litigation between virtually the same parties, though the Union insists that several of the original petitioners have abandoned the cause and the matter be confined to only the two petitioners who are before this Court pursuing the grievance while the others are deemed to have resigned to their fate and accepted the order of the Tribunal or the previous rejection of their requests at various levels. By the order impugned, the Tribunal has held that since Assistants in Assam Rifles, historically, did not have the same pay-scales as Assistants in other Central paramilitary forces, parity in pay-scale could not be sought with the other civilian Assistants in comparable organisations.
4. Under the Third Central Pay Commission, while the Assistants in Central Industrial Security Force, Indo-Tibetan Border Police, Sashastra Seema Bal and Border Security Force were granted a pay-scale of Rs. 425-800, Assistants in Assam Rifles were granted a pay-scale of Rs. 425-700. Again, the Fourth CPC granted a pay-scale of Rs. 1640-2900 to Assistants in the four other Central paramilitary forces but granted only Rs. 1400-2300 to Assistants in Assam Rifles. The Fifth CPC continued the distinction as Assistants in the other four paramilitary forces had their pay-scale revised to Rs. 5500 to 9000 while Assistants in Assam Rifles were recommended to receive Rs. 4500-7000.
5. It does not appear that the duties and obligations of civilian Assistants in the other four comparable paramilitary forces are any greater than or different from the duties and responsibilities of the civilian Assistants in Assam Rifles. Indeed, as would be evident from a recommendation of July 5, 2004 made by the Director-General of Assam Rifles to the Union Home Ministry, the same pay-scale as extended to Assistants in the four other paramilitary forces was demanded to be made effective for Assistants in Assam Rifles.
6. Paragraphs 2 and 5 of the recommendatory letter of July 5, 2004 may be noticed:
'2. It appears that our above proposal mixed up with consolidated proposal submitted subsequently vide our letter No. A/1-A/2787-86/492 dated 02 Feb 2001 seeking up gradation of pay scale of Assistant to Rs. 5500-9000 at par with the other CPOs and also for upgradation of pay scale of Superintendent and AO/AAO/RO/CGO.'
'5. In view of the above it is strongly recommended that Assistant of this Directorate may please be granted at least the revised pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 01-1-96 as per part 'B' of the first schedule of CCS(RP) Rules, 1997, pending finalisation of upgradation of pay scale of Assistant, Supdt and AO/AAO/RO/CGO at par with other CPOs as mentioned in para 2 above. This would reduce the financial hardship being faced by the Assistants to a great extent.'
7. It is apparent from a plain reading of the relevant letter of July 5, 2004 that the DGAR required the same pay-scale as in respect of other paramilitary forces to be extended to the Assistants in Assam Rifles. Such a recommendation could not have
The central legal point established in the judgment is the principle of equal pay for equal work, emphasizing that there should be no distinction in pay-scales for employees with similar duties and r....
Determination of pay scale and equivalence is a primary function of the executives and expert bodies like Pay Commission and is not a function of writ court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Arti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner, after being re-mustered from a clerical position to a general cadre, is not entitled to the benefits granted to clerical staff i....
The denial of equal pay and benefits to similarly situated personnel violates constitutional principles of equality, reaffirming the established parity in ranks between different roles in similar pos....
Disparity in pay scales violates Article 14, mandating equal pay for similar roles in military and civilian sectors.
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.