SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Guj) 952

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.
Natavarbhai Lavajibhai Oza – Petitioner 
Versus 
State Of Gujarat & Ors. – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 3144 of 2026 
Decided On : 13-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. R.D. Kinariwala
For the Respondents: MS. Foram Trivedi, AGP

Senior employees are entitled to parity in basic pay with juniors in the same cadre when discrepancies arise from mandated pay revisions. The 'stepping up' principle serves as a necessary corrective mechanism to ensure that seniority is respected and salary anomalies are eliminated, satisfying the requirement for non-discrimination.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Service Law - Pay parity - Stepping up of pay - Doctrine of equal pay for equal work - Implementation of pay commission recommendations resulting in junior employees receiving higher basic pay than seniors in the same cadre - Principle of stepping up applied to rectify salary anomaly - Such discrimination is violative of the constitutional mandate of equality. (Paras 2, 5, 21)

(B) Principle of Stepping Up - Essential conditions - Employees must belong to the same cadre and hold identical posts - Time scale of pay must be equal - Purported to remove salary-related heartburning and dissatisfaction - Failure to rectify creates a discriminatory anomaly that must be addressed by the state. (Paras 21, 22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, who were appointed prior to the implementation of the revised pay scales effective from January 1, 2006, found that employees junior to them, who were appointed after the cut-off date, were granted a higher basic pay due to the revised pay structure. The petitioners challenged this anomaly, seeking a direction for the stepping up of their pay to achieve parity with their juniors.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the existence of an anomaly where a senior employee receives lower pay than a junior in the same cadre is inherently discriminatory and violates the principle of equality. The court determined that once the conditions of identical cadre and posts are satisfied, the administrative authorities must apply the stepping up principle to align the senior's pay with that of the junior to eliminate the disparity.

Issues: Whether senior employees are entitled to seek pay parity with juniors through the principle of 'stepping up' of pay when salary anomalies arise from the implementation of revised pay scales.

Ratio Decidendi: The principle of 'stepping up' of pay is a recognized administrative mechanism designed to maintain the hierarchical salary structure within a cadre. It is incumbent upon the state to ensure that senior employees do not suffer financial prejudice compared to their juniors; consequently, any government directive creating such discrepancies must be read down to exclude discriminatory application, and pay must be calibrated to ensure parity.

Result: Petition allowed; the respondents were directed to step up the pay of the petitioners and grant all consequential benefits within twelve weeks.

Table of Content
1. claim for pay parity based on seniority and non-discriminatory salary fixation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. application of the 'stepping up' principle to rectify salary anomalies between senior and junior employees. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court mandate for re-fixation of pay and payment of arrears with interest. (Para 7)

ORDER :

NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Foram Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. The petitioners by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pray for a direction that the pay of the petitioners be put at par with their juniors who are appointed or or after 01.01.2006 and to place the petitioners at the stage of Rs.10810 in the pay band of Rs.9300-34800 (PB2) with effect from 01.01.2006.

3. The petitioners were appointed on different dates as a Shikshan Sahayaks and placed on a fixed salary of Rs.4500 for a period of five years. As on August 2005, the petitioners were in the pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000. By the coming into force of the 6th Pay Commission, their pay-scale came to be revised and implemented with effect from 01.01.2006 and they were placed in the pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800 with the grade pay of Rs.4200. Thereafter, the State through the Finance Department came out with a resolution dated 14.09.2011 by which the entry level pay was revised with effect from 01.01.2006. As per the said government resolution, the basic pay was fixed at Rs.10810 with grade pay of Rs.4400 as a result of which employees junior to the petitioners got more basic pay than the petitioners.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Kinariwala appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that an identical issue came up for consideration before this court in Special Civil Application No. 12207 of 2014 and this Court allowed the petition and directed the authority to step up the pay of the petitioners therein by placing them at the pay band with arrears from 01.01.2006 and to pay periodical rise and all consequential benefits.

5. Admittedly, when it is a matter of record that the petitioners were appointed much prior to the other employees junior to the present petitioners, the essential ingredient of 'stepping up of pay' in favour of the petitioners who were otherwise drawing less pay in the basic of Rs. 10230 would apply.

6. This Court in Special Civil Application No. 12207 of 2014 and allied matters has considered the very issue and observed accordingly:-

"20. Here in the present case also, the petitioners were appointed prior to January 01,2006 and their juniors were appointed on or after January 01, 2006, however, the pay in pay band of the juniors of the petitioners was fixed higher than that of the present petitioners and, thus, there is apparent anomaly in the salary being paid to the petitioners as against their juniors.

21. So far as the issue in question is concerned, it depends upon the applicability of the principle of stepping up. Admittedly, the petitioners had been appointed earlier to the category of Private Secretary, Grade-I, and some of their juniors got their pay fixed at a higher level than the petitioners on implementation of the Sixth Central Pay Commission in view of Rules, 2009. To remove the anomaly of a Government servant promoted or appointed to a higher post eartier drawing a lower rate of pay in that post than another Government servant junior to him in the lower grade and promoted or appointed subsequently to the higher post, the principle of stepping up of the pay is applied. In such cases the pay of the senior officer in the higher post is required to be stepped up to a figure equal to the pay as fixed for the junior officer in that higher post. The stepping up is required to be done with effect from the date of promotion or appointment of the junior officer. On refixation of the pay of the senior officer by applying the principle of stepping up, the next increment of the said officer wou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top