LexSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. versus WEST BENGAL MINIMUM WAGES INSPECTORS ASSOCIATION & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 3 S.C.R. 367 STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. v. WEST BENGAL MINIMUM WAGES INSPECTORS ASSOCIATION & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 3855 of ~007) MARCH 15, 2010 [R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Service law: West Bengal Services Revision of Pay and Allowances Rules, 1981 - Parity in pay scale - Prior to 1981 Rules, posts A B of lnspectors-AWM (subject posts) and Inspector (Co- operative Societies), Extension Officers (Panchayat) and KGO-JLRO (Revenue Officers)-reference catftgories in same D pay scale no. 9 and under 1981 Rules reference category posts given higher pay scale - Claim for parity by lnspectofs- A WM on basis of previous equal pay ...., Held: Grant of parity in pay scale depends upon comparative job· evaluation and equation of posts - Benefit of higher pay scale can only be E claimed by e~fablishing that holders of subject post and. reference category posts, discharge identical or similar duties . and functions and that the continuation of disparity is irrational and unjust - lnspectors-AMW neither pleaded nor proved the same - Thus, the claim cannot be granted - Pay Review Committee did not consider the duties and responsibilities F attached to different categories of posts while recommending , higher pay scale to subject posts - State Govemmentjustified · .. in rejecting the said recommendation - State Government directed to extend the benefit of Pay Scale No.10 (4500-9700) to lnspectors-AMW as recommended by Fourth Pay G Commission. Tf:le respondents were employed as lnspectors- AMW-(subject post) in Pay Scale No. 9 (300-600) and were 367 H ··~. 368 SUPREME'GOURT REPORTS [2010) 3 S.C.R. A subsequently abs'orbed into regular service. The Inspector (Co-operative Societies), Extension Officers (Pan~hayat) ~nd KGO-JLRO (Revenue Officers)-(reference category posts) were also in Pay Scale No. 9. Under the West Bengal Services Revision of Pay and Allowances B Rules, 1981, the 'reference category posts' were granted Pay Scale No. 11 (Rs.425-1050) whereas lnspectors-AMW were continued in Pay Scale No. 9. The respondents filed writ petition seeking higher Pay Scale No.11. The Single Judge of.High .Court permitted the respondents to make c a representation to the appropriate forum. During pendency of appeal, the Third Pay Commission . recommended that there was no need to upgrade lnspectors-AMW to a higher pay scale. The Pay Review Committee recommended that they should be assigned 0 the higher Pay Scale No.10 (Rs. 1390-2970) with effect from 1.1.86. The State Government did not accept the recommendations. Thereafter, the Fourth Pay Commission recommended Pay Scale No.10 for the post of lnspectors-AMW. The Division Bench of High Court E directed that the. respondents be given the same scale that would be given to those four posts under the Fourth Pay Commission. The questions which arose for consideration in the appeal are (1)whether the respondents were entitled to F the reliefs sought in the writ petition as originally filed; (2) whether the respondents are entitled to higher pay scale on the basis of the recommendations of the Pay Review Committee made in the year 1990; and (3) whether the respondents are entitled to higher pay scale as per G the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission and, if so, from what date? Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The order of the Division Bench of the High · H Court is set aside. However, in view of the submission STATE OF WEST BENGAL v. WEST BENGAL MINIMUM 369 WAGES INSPECTORS ASSOCIATION made by the State Government, the State Government is A directed to extend the benefit of Pay Scale No.10 (4500- 9700) to the lnspectors-AMW, to take effect notionally from 1.1.1996, with actual monetary benefits with effect from 1.1.2008. [Para 21] [385-B-C] Re: Question (1) B 2.1. The principles relating to granting higher scale of pay on the basis of equal pay for equal work are well settled. The evaluation of duties and responsibilities of different posts and determination of the Pay scales C applicable to such posts and determination of parity in duties and responsibilities are complex executive functions, to be carried out by expert bodies. Granting parity in pay scale depends upon comparative job evaluation and equation of posts. The principle "equal D pay for equal work" is not a fundamental right but a constitutional goal. It is dependent on various factors such as educa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.