IMPORTANT POINT
Even if persons are holding same rank/ designation and having similar powers, duties and responsibilities they can be placed in different scales of pay and cannot claim the benefit of the principle of equal pay for equal work.

Headnote:(a) M.P. Revision of Pay Rules, 1983 – Rule 7 – Memorandum dated 5th November, 1967 – police ranks given to Ministerial staff as also uniform and uniform allowance – Held they cannot claim parity of pay with Executive Force merely on that ground. (Para 9)
       (b) Service law – Pay scales – Parity – Even if persons are holding same rank/ designation and having similar powers, duties and responsibilities they can be placed in different scales of pay and cannot claim the benefit of the principle of equal pay for equal work – Instantly method of recruitment, qualifications for appointment, duties and responsibilities of the Ministerial and Executive staff different – Held, Ministerial employees not entitled to claim parity of pay-scales with the Executive Force. (Para 13)
       (1982) 1 SCC 618; (2017) 1 SCC 148 – Relied upon
       Facts of the case:
       These Appeals have been filed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, by which the claim of parity of pay-scales made by the Ministerial employees of the Police Department in the State of Madhya Pradesh was not accepted.
       Finding of the Court:
       High Court rightly held that Ministerial employees not entitled to claim parity of pay-scales with the Executive Force.
       Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

I.A. Nos.43-54 of 2015 in SLP (C) Nos.27288-27299 of 2011

(Applications for directions)

I.A.Nos. 6-7 of 2011 in SLP (C) Nos.30992-30993 of 2011 (Applications for impleadment.)

I.A. No………… in SLP (C) Nos.15743-15745 of 2012 (Applications for deletion of name of proforma Respondent Nos.6-18)

I.A. No………… in SLP (C) Nos.26760-26769 of 2012 (Application for deletion of name of proforma Respondent)

AND

I.A. No.96266 of 2018 (Application for substitution of deceased Petitioner No.4)

All the above Interlocutory Applications are allowed. Leave granted.

1. These Appeals have been filed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, by which the claim of parity of pay-scales made by the Ministerial employees of the Police Department in the State of Madhya Pradesh was not accepted.

2. Recruitment to the posts of Ministerial employees i.e. Head Clerk, Assistant Clerk, Accountant, Assistant Accountant, Record Keeper, Daftari, etc. was governed by the M.P. Police Regulations, which were framed under the Police Act, 1861. Inspectors, Sub-Inspectors, Subedars, Assistant Sub-Inspectors, etc. were appointed as per the provisions governed by Part III of M.P. Police 5th Regulations. On November, 1967, the State Government created new Police Ranks (Ministerial) in the State Police Force under Section 2 of the Police Act, 1861. The Ministerial employees who opted to be enrolled under the Police Act, 1861 would continue to draw emoluments in their existing pay-scales or as may be revised from time to time. They were given Uniform Grant and Uniform Maintenance Allowance in accordance with the scale prescribed for the corresponding regular posts (Executive). They would, however, not be entitled to House Rent or Rent Free Accommodation and Conveyance Allowance admissible to Officers of corresponding Ranks in the Executive branch. There was a difference in pay-scales between the Ministerial and Executive branches of the Police from the beginning, which can be seen from the M.P. Pay-Revision Rules, 1961, popularly known as “Tarachand Pay Scales”. The difference between pay-scales was continued even as per the “Faquir Chand Pay-Scales” in 1973. On 14th October, 1982, the Chaudhary Pay Commission submitted its Report in which it recommended as follows :

“We are unable to make recommendation of the pay scales equivalent to Police Executive Force to the ministerial employees of police department. They will have to satisfy with the pay scales received by the colleagues working in other departments.”

3. The M.P. Revision of Pay Rules, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1983 Rules) were brought into force on the basis of the Chaudhary Commission w.e.f ...1st April, 1981. Rule 7 provides for fixation of initial pay of the Revised Scale which reads as under:

“Rule 7- Fixation of initial pay in the revised scale- (1) .. .. (b) .. .. (iv)- Ad hoc increase sanctioned to certain categories of Government servants in Police, Home Guard, Jail and Excise Department, except the ad hoc increase allowed to Ministerial Staff of Police Department. (2) An amount equal to 20% of the basic pay (inclusive of stagnation allowance, if any) shall first be calculated. In case this amount exceeds Rs.150 it should be reduced to Rs.150. From such amount of interim relief, or in the case of certain categories of Government servants in the Engineering Department, the amount of the ad hoc increase sanctioned to them, shall be deducted and the balance be added to the emoluments arrived at as in sub-rule (1). If in any case, the balance is less than Rs.10/- then Rs.10/- shall be added to the emoluments. ”

4. Mr. P.N. Tripathi who was initially appointed to a Ministerial post and was working as a Deputy Superintendant of Police (DSP) in the office of the Director General of Police (DGP), Madhya Pradesh filed O.A. No. 165 of 1994 in the Administrative Tribunal, Bhopal Bench seeking revised pay-fixation and the quashing of an order passed for re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2012 Supreme(SC) 925

IMPORTANT POINTEven if persons are holding same rank/ designation and having similar powers, duties and responsibilities they can be placed in different scales of pay and cannot claim the benefit of the principle of equal pay for equal work.

Cases Referred (2)

IMPORTANT POINT
Even if persons are holding same rank/ designation and having similar powers, duties and responsibilities they can be placed in different scales of pay and cannot claim the benefit of the principle of equal pay for equal work.