LexSUPREME COURT EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION ETC. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
\ A B SUPREME COURT EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION ETC. ETC. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ETC. ETC. JULY 24, 1989 [M.M. DUTT AND T.K. THOMMEN, JJ.] Constitution of India-Articles I4, 16, 32, I36, 141 and 146- Special Leave Petition dismissed simpliciter-No declaration of law- ~. - When does a decision of Court operate as res judicata-Conditions of. C Service of Officers· and servants of Supreme Court-Primarily the responsibility of Parliaments-But if Parliament does not lay down the ""( conditions of service-Chief Justice or any other person authorised by him can do so--Service Rules are liable to be struck down, it unjust, oppressive, outrageous or directed to an unauthorised end. D Article 226-Writ-Dismissal of-In limine or on ground of /aches or availability of alternative remedy-Dismissal-Would not operate as res-judicata. Supreme Court Officers' and Servants (Conditions of Service and l_ Conduct) Rules-1961-Rules amended upto December 1985-Rules E do not reflect the enhanced pay Scales adopted on the basis of interim Orders of the Supreme Court or pay scales recommended by Pay Com- mission Supreme Court employees-Revision of pay scales-Reference to Pay Commission whether valid or incompetent. These writ Petitions have been filed by the employees of the J F Supreme Court through their Welfare Associations praying, in sub- stance, for enha1.1cement of their present pay scales. Writ Petition No. 80 I of 1986 has been filed by the Welfare Association representing class II and class III employees whereas Writ Petition No. 1201/86 has been filed by Welfare Association representing class IV employees and the third Writ Petition has heen filed hy retired employees. G In order to deal with and make recommendations in regard to various representations highlighting grievances regarding service con- ditions made by the staff, of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India constituted a committee consisting of five Judges of the Supreme Court. The committee was also asked to make recommendations H whether the pay scales of different categories of the staff warranted 488 ~. -,~ _...., i f .,.,. ). -~ SUPREME COURT EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSN. v. U.0.1. 469 upward revision. The Committee after consideration of the issues raised, made several recommendations but as regards the pay scale revision, it recommended that the matter be referred to the Third Pay Commis- sion, then sitting. However in the meanwhile, the High Court of Delhi, allowed various Writ Petitions filed before it by the members of the staff of Delhi High Court belonging to different categories. The result of the Orders passed by the Delhi High Court was, that the staff of that Higil Court started drawing mm:e pay in some categories of class IV, class II & III employees, than the employees of the Supreme Court similarly placed. Taking cue from the orders of the D~lhi High Court, the peti- tioners have filed these petitions invoking in aid the principle of "Equal pay for equal work". It is urged by the petitioners that the duties performed by the staff of the Supreme Court are similar rather more responsible, arduous and onerous to those performed by the members of the staff of Delhi High Court, hence they are entitled to pay like similar if not enhanced pay scales. It is urged that Special Leave Peti- tion filed by the Government before this Court against the orders of the Delhi High Court having been dismissed by this Court, the order of Delhi High Court has became final. In Writ Petition No. 801 of 1986, by an interim order dated 25. 7.86 this Court directed that the officers and members of the staff of the registry should get the same pay and allowances which were then being enjoyed by the officers and the members of the staff of the Delhi High Court belonging to the same category with effect from the date from which such scales of pay has been allowed to the officers and the members of the staff of the Delhi High Court. The Court also by the same order directed Respondent Nos. l and 2 to take necessary steps to refer the question of revision of pay scales to the Fourth Pay Commis- sion as suggested by the five Judges Committee. Some other interim orders were also passed giving higher pay to certain cetegories of employees, as was done by Delhi High Court. A B c D E F The Fourth Pay Commission to which the question of revision of G pay scales of the staff of Supreme Court was referred
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.