RAJESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU versus GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS.

Citation: [2021] 9 S.C.R. 846 · Decided: 17-12-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
846
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 9 S.C.R.
   [2021] 9 S.C.R. 846
846
RAJESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU
v.
GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 7578 of 2021)
DECEMBER 17, 2021
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD
AND M.R. SHAH, JJ.]
Service Law – Grant of pay-scales – Autonomous body vis-à-
vis State Government – Claim for parity – Appellants worked as
daily rated employees with the Respondent-Board – Respondent
adopted a Resolution in 1988 (the Parent Resolution) passed by
State Government granting benefits to the skilled daily wager
workmen – Appellants were accordingly granted pay scale of Rs.750
and other benefits flowing from the said Resolution – Subsequent
Resolutions issued by State Government in 1991 and 1992 modified
the Parent Resolution, granting pay scale of Rs.950-1500 to a class
of daily wagers as specified therein – Appellants claimed entitlement
to the aforesaid pay scale – Writ petition allowed by Single Judge –
Order set aside by Division Bench – On appeal,  held: Board never
adopted the subsequent Resolutions – Appellants working with the
respondent, an autonomous body cannot claim parity with the
employees of the State Government – State Government and the
autonomous bodies cannot be put at par – Appellants cannot claim
the benefits flowing from the subsequent Government Resolutions
as a matter of right – Further,  benefits under the subsequent
resolutions were mistakenly given by some of the zonal offices, which
subsequently came to be withdrawn and recovery was also sought
– Appellants cannot claim parity with such other daily rated
employees by invoking Article 14 if they otherwise are not entitled
to such benefit – Constitution of India – Article 14 – Principle of
equal pay for equal work.
Service Law – Fixation of wage/pay-scale – Held: Economic
viability or the financial capacity of the employer is an important
factor while fixing the wage structure – Employees cannot claim
that their pay-scales should necessarily be revised and/or they must
be granted certain additional benefits/benefits – Granting of pay
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
847
parity by Courts may result in a cascading effect having adverse
consequences.
Constitution of India – Article 14 – Principle of positive
equality – Held: Article 14 embodies concept of positive equality
alone and not negative equality – It cannot be relied upon to
perpetuate illegality and irregularity.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The Board never adopted the subsequent
Resolutions dated 01.05.1991 and 15.02.1992. The parent
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 was specifically approved by the
Board vide communication dated 08.06.1989. On the contrary
the administrative instructions vide communication dated
29.08.1991 were issued to all the Chief Engineers of zonal offices
that benefits pursuant to Government Resolution of 1991 are
not to be granted to the daily rated employees of the Board. Right
from adopting the parent Resolution dated 17.10.1988, the
Respondent-Board granted benefits under the parent Resolution
to all the original writ petitioners-daily rated employees upon
their completion of 5 years and of 10 years. Therefore, as such
the Board which is an autonomous and statutory body created
under the Act never adopted the Government Resolutions dated
01.05.1991 and 15.02.1992 and unless the said Resolutions are
adopted by the Respondent-Board, the daily rated employees
working with the Respondent-Board shall not be entitled to the
benefits flowing from the subsequent resolutions. There shall
not be automatic adoption and/or applicability of the subsequent
resolutions. Under the circumstances as rightly held by the
Division Bench, the daily rated employees of the Respondent –
Board cannot claim the benefits from the Resolutions of 1991
and 1992 as a matter of right. [Para 13.2][861-E-H; 862-A-B]
1.2 Even being the daily rated employees working with the
Respondent-Board they cannot claim the parity with the
employees of the State Government. The Respondent-Board is
an autonomous and statutory body created under the Act. It is
ultimately for the Respondent-Board to take a conscious decision
which can be termed as a policy decision on the pay scales to be
RAJESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU v. GUJARAT
WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
848
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 9 S.C.R.
adopted and/or certain benefits which would have financial
implications. Everything depends upon its economic viability or
the financial capacit

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