Part-time employees cannot claim equal pay with full-time employees unless duties and responsibilities are qualitatively similar; they are entitled to minimum wage enhancements per applicable law.

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J):

This is the second round of litigation. In the first round of litigation, the applicant filed OA No. 3727/2015 before this Tribunal. Vide order dated 30.05.2019, this Tribunal disposed of the said OA with the following directions:

6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the O.A. is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to make a comprehensive representation within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and, in case, such a representation is received by the respondents, the Respondent No. 2 is directed to consider such representation and pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order. The respondents are further directed to release the monthly consolidated salary of the applicant within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment in the way of making such a payment. It is further directed that, if at all, the respondents find that there is any legal impediment in making actual payment of the salary of the applicant they are directed to communicate the reasons to the applicant within the said four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondents are further directed that if the applicant’s services are being availed by them, they should ensure that the applicant is paid his admissible salary in time, every month.”

2. By virtue of the impugned order dated 23.09.2020, the applicant's request for enhancement of pay has been rejected. It is not disputed that the applicant has been working as a part-time contractual employee on a consolidated salary of Rs. 6000/- per month since 28.03.2012 despite the respondents' own Order dated 05.08.2011 which provides benefits to full-time contractual appointees. The said order, reads as under:-

“In continuation of this office order No. F.76(358- A)/DSW/ICDS/07- 08/P-1/9705-9798 dated 19 July, 2011, the salary (Fixed amount) from Rs. 4000/- to Minimum pay in pay band for the post+Grade Pay+DA may be read as the salary (fixed amount Rs.10570/-) equal to amount minimum pay of pay band of scale of Rs.5200-20200+Grade Pay Rs.1800/-+DA @ 51% (as ori 01-06-2011) applicable w.e.f. 01-01-2011 i.e. Rs 3570/- (Rs.5200/- +Rs.1800/-+Rs.3570/- = Rs.10570/-).”

3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the grant of relief. He relied on the averments contained in the counter reply and submitted as under:

3.1. Learned counsel for the respondents had submitted that the applicant is working as a part-time contractual computer teacher and has prayed for the grant of pay and allowances, as are payable to a full time computer teacher (on contract), along with arrears of pay and allowances. However, it is submitted that there is no full time contractual computer teacher, teaching at his institute, hence, the question of drawing comparisons in the nature of duties discharged, does not arise, and consequently, the question of parity of pay does not arise.

3.2. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that vide order dated 28.03.2012, the competent authority was pleased to engage one part time computer teacher on consolidated salary of Rs.6000/-PM, and the same was done as per codal formalities and directions of the Finance Deptt., GNCTD, hence, it is submitted that the applicant's reliance on Finance Deptt.'s order dated 20.07.2010, for seeking pay and allowances as available to full time contractual persons, even otherwise is not applicable to the present case, as the Finance deptt. was duly consulted in this regard.

3.3. Learned counsel for the respondents argued that the applicant is merely working as a part