Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Janta Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and the Principal of B.N. Engineering College, challenged the judgment of the Industrial Court, Yavatmal, dated 04.03.2005 in Complaint ULP No. 11 of 2003. The respondents, two widows of former employees, were appointed on compassionate grounds as sweepers on consolidated salary of Rs.1,000 per month. They worked full eight hours cleaning toilets and sweeping in the Girls Hostel. They claimed that two male sweepers, Shriram Tak and Deepak Tak, performing similar work in the Boys Hostel were paid salary in the pay scale of Rs.750940. The Industrial Court allowed their complaint under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, directing the petitioners to pay them salary in the said pay scale with arrears from 07.02.2003. The High Court upheld the Industrial Court's order, holding that the complainants were entitled to equal pay for equal work and that the denial constituted an unfair labour practice. The court noted that the petitioners did not dispute the facts and that the complainants were performing the same duties as the male sweepers. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Equal Pay for Equal Work - Unfair Labour Practice - Items 5 & 9 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - Female sweepers appointed on compassionate ground on consolidated salary claimed equal pay as male sweepers performing similar work - Industrial Court directed employer to pay salary in pay scale of Rs.750940 with arrears - Held that denial of equal pay for equal work amounts to unfair labour practice and the direction is justified (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether female sweepers appointed on compassionate ground on consolidated salary are entitled to same pay scale as male sweepers performing similar work, and whether denial thereof constitutes unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. The Industrial Court's judgment dated 04.03.2005 in Complaint ULP No. 11 of 2003 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Equal pay for equal work
- Unfair labour practice
- Compassionate appointment
- Consolidated salary
- MRTU & PULP Act
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 360
Writ Petition No. 3045 of 2005
Shri A.M. Gordey with Mrs. R.D. Raskar for petitioners; Mrs. T.D. Khade, AGP for respondent No. 1
Janta Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and The Principal, B.N. Engineering College
The Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Bench at Yavatmal; Smt. Chandrabai wd/o Punam Charawande; Smt. Kamlabai wd/o Gulab Chaware
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India challenging Industrial Court's order directing equal pay for equal work.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the Industrial Court's judgment dated 04.03.2005 in Complaint ULP No. 11 of 2003.
Filing Reason
Petitioners challenged the Industrial Court's direction to pay salary in pay scale to female sweepers appointed on compassionate ground.
Previous Decisions
Industrial Court allowed the complaint and directed payment of salary in pay scale of Rs.750940 with arrears from 07.02.2003.
Issues
Whether female sweepers appointed on compassionate ground on consolidated salary are entitled to same pay scale as male sweepers performing similar work?
Whether denial of equal pay for equal work constitutes unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the appointment was purely temporary and on consolidated salary, and that the complainants were not entitled to pay scale.
Respondents argued that they performed same work as male sweepers and were entitled to equal pay for equal work.
Ratio Decidendi
Female employees appointed on compassionate ground performing same work as male employees are entitled to equal pay for equal work. Denial thereof amounts to unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act.
Judgment Excerpts
By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioners seek to challenge the judgment dated 04.03.2005 delivered by the Industrial Court, Yavatmal, in Complaint ULP No. 11 of 2003.
The facts are not much in dispute.
The Industrial Court has directed the petitioners to pay them salary in pay scale of Rs.750940 accordingly with arrears from 07.02.2003.
Procedural History
Respondents filed Complaint ULP No. 11 of 2003 before Industrial Court, Yavatmal on 30.01.2003. Industrial Court allowed complaint on 04.03.2005. Petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 3045 of 2005 before Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was dismissed on 06.01.2010.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Items 5 & 9 of Schedule IV
- Constitution of India: Articles 226 and 227
