LexDEB NARAYAN SHYAM AND ORS. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
-.J DEB NARAYAN SHY AM AND ORS. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. DECEMBER I, 2004 ' ~ .- . [B.N. AGRAWAL AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.] Service Law: West Bengal Service (Revision of Pay and Allownace) Rules, 1961,- Surveyors and Amins working in different Departments-Parity in pay scale by Amins with Surveyors-Claim of-Principle of 'Equal pay for equal work '-Applicability of~Held: Nature of duties and functions and essential recruitment qualifications of Am ins different from that of Surveyors-As such principle of 'Equal pay for equal work' not applicable-Hence, Amin not entitled to claim parity in pay scale with Surveyor-However, various decisions of High Court giving parity in scale treating an earlier decision giving parity as precedent despite clear stipulation that it should not be treated as precedent, unchallenged by the State Government-Effect of- Held: Earlier decisions cannot operate as res judicata or estoppel-Jn another matter, Division Bench of High Court held the earlier decisions to be per incuriam and cannot be treated as precedent against which beneficiaries of earlier decision filed SPL as their rights adversely affected on not being heard by Division Bench-This order of Division Bench was A B c D E F set aside and matter was remitted back, which amounted to review of the whole issue-Also the effect of earlier decisions neutralized by filing of SLP-However, if the earlier decisions are allowed to remain it would create anomalous situation by creating two groups, one getting pay scale 9 and other getting scale 6 or 7, and also resulting in overburdening of State exchequer-As such inherent powers under Article 142 invoked-Amins directed to be fixed in pay scales as given in the Rules-However, pay drawn by them under the earlier decisions not to be recovered-Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 11-Evidence Act, 1872, Section 115- G Constitution of India, 1950, Article 142. Am ins recruited in the State of West Bengal filed a petition to claim same pay scale as that of Surveyors. Single Judge of High Court without discussing whether the qualification and duties of Amin and Surveyor H 551 552 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. A are same or not and on reference from a Commissioner that Amins performed same duties as Surveyors directed that the Amins be granted same pay scale. However, the Government did not contest the same. Thereafter, as the Amins were not given the said pay scale, contempt petition was filed. The Government was directed to give Am ins the same B pay scale as that of Surveyors and it was clarified that the order will not be treated as precedent for any other cases and the Government would contest the otlfer cases. However, subsequently in 36 cases the Government did not file any application nor pointed to the High Court about the precedent stipulation and the High Court following the previous c decision granted the Amins the same pay scale as that of Surveyors. Thereaft~r, Amins in another matter claimed the same relief as granted in earlier decision. Single Judge of High Court disapproved the earlier decision and dismissed the writ petition. The beneficiaries of the earlier decisions filed Special Leave Petition before this Court on the ground that the writ petitioners in all the 36 cases were not heard by the Division D Bench and as such their rights are going to be adversely affected. This Court set aside the order of Division Bench of High Court and remitted tlle matter to the Division Bench of High Court. Division Bench held that the decision in earlier case should not be treated as precedent; that Amins cannot be equated with Surveyors, however, looking to the E qualification of Surveyors with only school final pass or Madhyamik and practical experience they were given pay Scale 7 and as such directed the State Government to give Am ins pay scale 7; that the Amins enjoying Scale 9 pursuant to the order of the Court would be placed in Scale 7; and no recovery would be made from them prior to October 1, 2001. Hence, the present appeals by the State Government and the F private parties. G Private respondents contended that the qualifications of the Amins and Surveyors might be different but since the duties discharged by them are identical, they are entitled to get the pay scale of Surveyors on the principle of "equal pay for equal work"; and that the earlier decisions given in all the 36 writ petition
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.