GRIH KALYAN KENDRA WORKERS' UNION versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [1991] 1 S.C.R. 15 · Decided: 09-01-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.N. SINGH · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

-
GRIH KAL YAN KENDRA WORKERS' UNION 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
JANUARY 9, 1991 
[K.N. SINGH AND N.D OJHA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India 1950-Articles 14 and 16--c-Equal pay for 
equal work-Principle-Grih Kalyan Kendra employees-Treatment 
, 
on par with employees of Union of India, New Delhi Municipal Com-
,l , mittee and Delhi Administration-Whether arises. 
1 
Grih Kalyan Kendra is a Society registered under the Societies 
Registration Act 1960. It is a welfare organization working under the 
aegis of the Department of Personnel and .Administrative Reforms, 
Ministry of Home Affairs. Its object is to establish Kendras to help 
needy Government servants especially those belonging to the lower 
income group by providing to their dependents opportunity of gainful 
work and training during their leisure time so that the dependents of 
such .Government servants may be able to supplement to the meagre 
income of the family and to acquire skill and experience for obtaining 
employment elsewhere. In furtherance of this object, the Kendra has 
set up nursery centres, craft centres, and creches etc .. in Delhi and other 
cities where the work of imparting necessary training is carried on. The 
management of the Kalyan Kendras vests in the Board which consists 
of officers of the Department of Personnel and in order to augment its 
resources the Ministry gives grant to the Kendras. The terms and 
conditions or tenure of service of its employees have not been regulated 
by any Rules framed by the Kendra. The staff of the Kendras fall in 
two categories viz. (i) regular staff taken on deputation from other 
central government offices who draw their salaries in regular scales of 
pay with the deputation and other allowances as admissible_to the cent-
ral government employees and (ii) employees employed at the various 
centres of the Kendra on ad-hoc basis, some of whom have been work-
ing an f"~ed salary called honorarium while others are working on the 
piece rate wages, without any gratuity or pension or Provident Fund. 
The workers' Union of the Kendra has f"ded this writ petition for 
a declaration that the Kendra wherein the workers are employed is a 
'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and such it 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
\ 
is prayed by them that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the 
respondents to pay regular PaY scale on par with other employees 
H 
15 
• 
16 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1991] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
performing similar work under the Union of India, New Delhi Munici-
pal Committee and other Departments of the Delhi Administration, as 
~ 
according to them the wages paid to them are low as compared to the 
employees performing identical duties in the said Departments. Their 
contention is that the Kendra being a 'State', the respondents are 
· under constitutional obligation to pay them higiJer scale of pay pre-
B scribed for the Government Departments, on the principle "equal pay 
for equal work". They have raised claim to pension, gratuity and pro-
vident fund etc. also. The respondents contest their claim on the plea 
that the employees working in tbe Kendra are not regular employees / 
and the duties performed by theJD are not comparable to any of the 
--
employees working under NDMC or any other DEPARTMENT OF 
' 
~ c THE Delhi Administration or Union of India, the Status of the Kendra 
being unique. 
Dismissing the writ petition, the Court, 
HELD: There being no other Government or semi-Government 
'( 
D employees who can be regarded, even broadly, as being situated simi-
larly as tbe employees of the Kendra, the principle of equal pay for 
equal work cannot be said to be violated by the payment of mere 
honorarium to these employees, [27E) 
The fmdlngs recorded by the former Chief Justice to whom the 
E matter was referred earlier clearly shows that there has been no 
discrimination as the petitioners are not being discriminated from those 
.~ 
wbQ are situated equally, The petitioner's claim for the benefit of 
eqµal pay for equal wor~, therefore must fall. Their claim for the -
issue of direction to the respondents to provide for the pension, 
gratuity and provident fund for the employees of the Grih Kalyan must 
F 
also fail. [27H; 28A-B] 
~ 
I 
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of '---( 
India and Ors., {1979] 3 SCC 489; P.K. Ramachandra Iyer & Ors. v. 
... 
Union of India and Ors., [1984] 2 ·sec 141; B.S. Minhas v. Indian 
Statistical Institute and Ors.

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.