NATIONAL FEDERATION OF STATE NFC (PHYSICAL EDUCATION} TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 16-11-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.H. KANIA · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF STATE NFC (PHYSICAL 
A 
EDUCATION} TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA 
NOVEMBER 16, 1992 
B 
[M.H. KANIA, CJ. AND S. MOHAN, J.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 14--National Fitness Corps-Junior 
Grade I Physical Training Teachers initially appointed by Central Government 
transferred to various State Govemments-Scale of pay equivalent to that of C 
primary teachers of Central School grante~Educational qualification, nature 
of duty and responsibilities different from those prescribed for Secondary 
School Physical Instmctors-Whether entitled to scale of Secondary Sc/tool 
Physical Instmctors. 
D 
Equal pay for equal work-Principle of-Whether applicable where 
qualifications, nature of duties and responsibilities are different. 
The Petitioner-Federation, representing Physical Education 
Teachers working in various schools other than primary schools in the 
country, filed a writ petition before this Court contending that the N.F.C. E 
Instructors, previously known as N.D.S. Instructor Junior Grade i, were 
given, by mistake, those pay scales which were applicable to teachers in 
primary schools, instead of the pay scale of secondary school teacher and 
that though there were subsequent revisions, the pay scale applicable to a 
secondary teacher was denied, that since the petitioners were not working F 
in primary schools, they could not be fixed on the pay scale as applieable 
to primary school teachers, and that they would be entitled to the scale t f 
pay as applicable to secondary school teachers and the revision thereof, 
that while the Kendriya Vidyalaya teachers had been fixed on the pay scale 
of Rs.330-560 for primary teachers, there was no justification whatever to G 
treat the teachers of the petitioner-Federation as ~elonging to the grade of 
primary school teachers when, in fact, none of the teachers belonging tc~ 
the petitioner-Federation was working in primary school, and, therefore it 
was clear case of a denial of equal pay for equal work. 
In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India, it was H 
1 
2 
SUPREMECOURTREPORTS [1992) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
submitted. that the scale of pay given to the petitioners was on the basis of 
their qualification and as per their recruitment rules, that the relevance 
of Kendriya Vidyalayas' pay scales was due to the fact that they had the 
pay scale of Rs.330-560 for their primary teachers in their pay structure 
and these were cited as example of pay fixation as done by Kendriya 
B Vidyalayas, and it was a mere coincidence that the revised scale of Junior 
Grade I Instructors was equivalent to that of primary teachers of Kendriya 
Vidyalayas; that since they were not having the essential qualifications for 
C~ntral Schools PETs, they could not be given their scales irrespective of 
the fact that they were doing duties of physical education teachers, that 
c the category of Senior Grade II N.D.S. Instructors had been given those 
scales on the basis of their qualifications and experience and the 
equivalence of scales was a mere coincidence as the cadre of service of 
N.D.S. Instructors was a separate one under the National Discipline 
Scheme/ National Fitness Corps Organ_isation and therefore, there was no 
violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work. It was also contended 
D that it was incorrect on the part of the petitioners to say that there were 
two grades, one for primary school teacher and another for secondary 
school teacher; and that the work was equal; the grades were based on 
qualifications, and the responsibilities were entirely different, and hence 
the principle of equal pay for equal work could not apply to the instant 
E 
case; in short, where gradation was based purely on the qualification, the 
petitioners could not have a valid complaint. 
Dismissing the Writ Petition, this Court, 
F 
HELD: 1. 5 non-gazetted categories of N.D.S. employees namely, (1) 
Supervisor, (2) N.D.S. Instructor Senior Grade I, (3) N.D.S. Instructor 
Senior Grade II, (4) N.D.S. ·Instructor Junior Grade I and, (5) N.D.S. 
InstructOr Junior Grade II which later on came to be merged with Junior 
Grade I with effect from 1.3.71, came to be fixed on different pay scales. 
G Such fixation of pay scale was based on the respective qualifications and 
experience as per the Recruitment Rules. Therefore, the principle of equal 
pay for equal work would not apply to the instant case. [9-F-G] 
Mewa Ram Kanojia v.Al

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