Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the appointment of petitioners as Supervisors under the Adult Education Scheme in Haryana, where they claimed equal pay for equal work against the State Government. The petitioners were appointed since 1978 on a fixed salary and treated as temporary government servants, facing deliberate breaks in service every six months. They argued that their roles were similar to those of regular Supervisors who were paid more and had permanent status. The State contended that the petitioners were not full-time employees and that their recruitment process differed from regular Supervisors. The court analyzed the qualifications and duties of the petitioners, finding them equivalent to those of regular Supervisors. It emphasized that the doctrine of equal pay for equal work applied, regardless of the temporary nature of their appointments. The court ruled that the petitioners were entitled to the same pay scale as their counterparts, directing the State to fix their salaries based on their length of service while disregarding the breaks. The decision underscored the importance of equal treatment in employment, particularly in public service roles, and mandated the State to ensure fair compensation for the petitioners' contributions to adult education.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Equal Pay for Equal Work - Discrimination in Pay Scales - Constitution of India, Articles 14 and 16 - Petitioners contended that they performed similar duties as regular Supervisors but were paid less due to their temporary status. The court held that the nature of duties being similar, the petitioners were entitled to the same pay scale as regular employees, emphasizing the doctrine of equal pay for equal work (Paras 723-726).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, performing similar duties as regular Supervisors, are entitled to the same pay scale despite being appointed on a temporary basis.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition partly, directing that the petitioners be paid on the same basis as regular Supervisors, fixing their pay according to their length of service while disregarding breaks in service. The implementation was to be effective from September 1, 1985, with a directive for payment of the difference in salaries by October 2, 1987.
Law Points
- Equal pay for equal work
- discrimination in pay scales
- temporary employment
- qualifications for appointment
- burden of proof in employment disputes
