Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Dineshbhai Chaturbhai Solanki and others, were appointed by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation to Class-IV posts but were assigned the duties of drivers, which are Class-III posts. They filed a writ petition under Articles 14, 16, 39(d), and 226 of the Constitution seeking directions to consider their appointment to the posts of drivers with consequential benefits. During the hearing, the petitioners, through their advocate, stated that they were ready to accept only the difference in pay between Class-III and Class-IV for the period they worked as drivers, and did not press other reliefs. The court noted that it was undisputed that the petitioners were appointed as Class-IV but performed driver duties without receiving Class-III salary. The court directed the respondent Corporation to calculate and pay the difference of salary to each petitioner for the actual period they worked as drivers, within eight weeks. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with rule made absolute to that extent.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Equal Pay for Equal Work - Articles 14, 16, 39(d) of Constitution of India - Petitioners appointed as Class-IV employees but assigned duties of Class-III (Driver) - Court directed respondent to pay difference of salary between Class-III and Class-IV for the period they worked as drivers, as petitioners accepted the difference and did not press other reliefs - Held that petitioners are entitled to salary difference for the actual period they discharged duties as drivers (Paras 4-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether petitioners appointed as Class-IV but performing duties of Class-III (Driver) are entitled to salary of Class-III post for the period they worked as drivers.
Final Decision
The court directed the respondent Corporation to calculate and pay the difference of salary between Class-III and Class-IV to each petitioner for the actual period they worked as drivers, within eight weeks. The petition was disposed of with rule made absolute to that extent.
Law Points
- Equal pay for equal work
- Articles 14
- 16
- 39(d) of Constitution of India
- Writ jurisdiction under Article 226
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 1079
R/Special Civil Application No. 4242 of 2015
Parth D. Patel for petitioners, Alkesh N. Shah for respondent
Dineshbhai Chaturbhai Solanki & Ors.
Vadodara Municipal Corporation
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 14, 16, 39(d) and 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction for appointment to the post of driver with consequential benefits.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought direction to respondent Corporation to consider their case for appointment on the posts of driver with all consequential benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioners were appointed as Class-IV but assigned duties of Class-III (Driver) and paid only Class-IV salary.
Issues
Whether petitioners are entitled to salary of Class-III post for the period they worked as drivers despite being appointed as Class-IV.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners submitted that they are ready to accept the difference of pay between Class-III and Class-IV for the period they worked as drivers and did not press other reliefs.
Respondent did not dispute that petitioners were appointed as Class-IV but worked as drivers.
Ratio Decidendi
Employees appointed to a lower post but performing duties of a higher post are entitled to the difference in salary for the period they actually discharged the higher post duties, based on the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Judgment Excerpts
It is not in dispute between the parties that all the petitioners before this Court are appointed by the respondent to the post of Class-IV but were assigned duty of driver i.e. Class-III. Nonetheless, none of the petitioners have received so far salary of Class-III.
The respondent is directed to calculate the difference of salary between Class-III and Class-IV for the period each petitioner worked as driver and pay the same to the respective petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed in 2015. After hearing, the court disposed it on 09/02/2026 with directions.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 14, 16, 39(d), 226
