Case Note & Summary
The case involved three sets of appeals from employees working in pension paying offices in Nepal against the Union of India. The appellants sought confirmation in their posts and parity in emoluments with India-based employees, claiming they performed identical work. The appeals were transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, which ruled that the appellants, being locally recruited in Nepal, could not claim parity in pay under Article 14 of the Constitution, as the Constitution does not apply outside India. The Tribunal allowed some claims for confirmation but upheld the validity of terminations for some appellants while providing compensation for others. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, agreeing with the Tribunal's findings on the classification of employees and the nature of their appointments. The court noted that the appellants were temporary employees whose services could be terminated at any time, and the Tribunal's decisions were based on rational grounds. The court concluded that there was no merit in the appeals regarding pay parity and reinstatement, resulting in a dismissal of the appeals without costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Equality Before Law - Applicability of Article 14 - Employees posted outside India cannot invoke Article 14 of the Constitution - Constitution does not apply outside India, hence claims for parity in pay are not maintainable - Held that the Tribunal's view on the applicability of Article 14 was not examined in detail as the merits were considered (Paras 10-11). B) Employment Law - Termination of Services - Validity of termination orders - Tribunal upheld some terminations as valid while setting aside others due to lack of inquiry, granting compensation instead - Held that the Tribunal rationally dealt with the circumstances of each case (Paras 20-22).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants are entitled to parity in pay and reinstatement in service.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, agreeing with the Tribunal's findings that the appellants could not claim parity in pay under Article 14 and that the terminations were valid in certain cases. Compensation was granted where terminations were deemed improper.
Law Points
- Article 14 of the Constitution
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- temporary employment
- parity of pay
- termination of services
