Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The matter is kept on 18.11.2019."

10. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta for the petitioner-Union submitted that the members of the petitioner-Union are entitled to get the same pay scale as is being paid to the employees of the Ashram Shala and alternatively pay scale of employees of Chhatralaya for physical handicapped and Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe should be paid to the members of the petitioner-Union who are also working in Chhatralaya of the NGO rendering the services to the students of backward class.

19. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mehta submitted that the contention of the respondents that the payment of fixed salary in case of members of the petitioner-Union is justified by stating that hostels and Chhatralayas managed for Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe and other backward class C/SCA/26938/2006 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2022 students are getting 90% salary grant only whereas hostels and Ashram Shalas run by the Samaj Suraksha are getting 100% grant, would amount to clear discrimination. It was submitted that such discrimination is without any basis in view of identical procedure for appointment, qualification and duties in both the cases. It was submitted that there is commonality of the work and nature of duties of the members of the petitioner-Union working in different Hostels (Chhatralayas) and similar set up of those working in Government aided institutions receiving 100% grants like Ashram Shalas or Chhatralayas run by other department of the State Government.

36. Thus, in view of the above conspectus of law and considering the facts of the present case, there is no difference between the appointment procedure, qualification and duties discharged by the employees of the hostel getting 90% grant and employees of hostel getting 100% grant. The petitioner- Union has been able to demonstrate parity in the duties and responsibilities of the members of its Association by establishing that the subject post occupied by the members of the petitioner-Union are required to discharge equal work of equal value as the C/SCA/26938/2006 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2022 similar post held by the similarly situated employees of Ashram Shalas and hostels getting 100% grant. Therefore, members of the petitioner-Union discharging the identical duties cannot be treated differently in the matter of their pay merely because they are employed in the hostels getting 90% grant-in- aid. It is apparent that the members of petitioner-Union are performing their duties of the same quality and of the same degree as that of similar employees of Ashram Shalas and hostels getting 100% grant. There is nothing on record to point out that the members of petitioner-Union are having different degree of responsibility reliability and confidentiality which entitles them to get only fixed pay vis-à-vis the employees of the Ashramshala and hostels getting 100% grant. Only because there is a difference of amount of grant-in-aid from the State Government by different NGOs, there cannot be any discrimination for payment of pay of members of the petitioner- Union as per the parameters laid down by the Apex Court for applying the principle of "equal pay for equal work" as stated here in above.

37. In view of above stated legal position with regard to the application of principle of "equal pay for equal work" in the facts of the case, members of the petitioner-Union are C/SCA/26938/2006 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2022 entitled to get at-least minimum pay scale payable to the employees who are similarly situated in Ashram Shalas/hostel getting 100% grant from the State Government.

38. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, the petition succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The members of the petitioner-Union are entitled to get pay scale or at-least minimum pay scale equivalent to the similarly situated employees of Ashram Shalas or hostels getting 100% grant from the State Government.