Equal Work, Equal Pay: High Court Slams Arbitrary Pay Fixation for Educators

In a significant ruling protecting the rights of public servants, the High Court of Rajasthan (Jodhpur Bench) has struck down the practice of assigning different pay-scales to government employees selected in the same recruitment process based solely on their joining dates. Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma held that such discrimination violates Article 14 of the Constitution, ordering the state to rationalize the salary structures of affected school lecturers.

The Backdrop: A Tale of Two Joining Dates

The dispute arose from the selection of School Lecturers (Sanskrit) under a 2015 recruitment drive. While all petitioners were selected through a singular process, the respondent authorities issued appointment orders on different dates.

The conflict centered on an administrative quirk: those who joined their services on or before June 30, 2017, were granted an additional annual grade increment. In contrast, petitioners who joined after that date—but still within the officially mandated final cut-off date of July 10, 2017—were denied this increment, leading to permanent disparities in their pay-scale relative to their colleagues appointed alongside them.

Arguments from the Bar

The petitioners, represented by Mr. M.L. Deora, argued that employees selected through the same recruitment advertisement for the same post constitute a single unit. They contended that linking pay-scales to incidental variations in joining dates, when all candidates joined within the prescribed deadline, creates an irrational and discriminatory class system.

Conversely, the state defended its actions by citing a Finance Department Circular dated September 30, 2017. Respondents argued that the pay structure was a policy mandate and that the incremental benefits were tied strictly to the June 30th date, irrespective of the existence of a later final cut-off date for joining.

The Court’s Legal Analysis

Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma rejected the state's reliance on the departmental circular, noting that administrative guidelines cannot override constitutional guarantees. The Court emphasized that when candidates are selected in a common recruitment process, the state must adopt a uniform criterion for benefits like increments—either the first date of joining or the final cut-off date.

The Court held that creating "sub-classes" among candidates from the same selection process based on arbitrary date thresholds serves no legitimate administrative purpose and undermines the spirit of equality.

Key Observations

The judgment offers a firm rebuke of mechanical bureaucratic implementation:

• "The candidates who have been selected, appointed and joined their services in the same recruitment process... cannot be discriminated in the matter of fixation of pay."
• "There cannot be any unequal fixation of the pay among the persons who were selected in the same recruitment process on the same post, basing on the date of their joining."
• "Such discrimination committed by the respondents is unsustainable even if the same is based on the circular of the Finance Department."
• "The respondents should have adopted first date of joining or last date of joining so as to grant annual grade increments... They cannot be permitted to adopt two different dates of joining."

The Verdict and Its Impact

In allowing the writ petition, the Court directed the state to treat all lecturers from the 2015 recruitment drive as a single unit for the purpose of grade increments. The respondents have been ordered to conduct an exercise to rectify the pay anomalies within one month of receiving the order.

This judgment serves as a vital precedent for service jurisprudence in Rajasthan, reinforcing the principle that government salary structures must be rooted in logic and equity rather than erratic scheduling. It places the onus on administrative departments to ensure that internal circulars do not undermine the constitutional right to equal treatment for similarly situated employees.