Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 124 (2.33 seconds)
Documents citing Mewa Ram Kanojia vs All India Institute Of Medical Sciences ... on 9 March, 1989

Hira Nand vs Union Of India And Others on 22 September, 2017

Reference was made to the Constitution Bench decision in P. Narasinga Rao (supra) and decisions in Mewa Ram Kanojia versus All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Others, (1989) 2 SCC 235 and V. Markendeya and Others versus State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, (1989) 3 SCC 191 to hold that it was open for the State to classify employees on the basis of qualifications, duties, and responsibilities and if such classification has a reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved, i.e., efficiency in administration, the State would be justified in prescribing different pay scales. Unequals cannot claim equality. Prayer for „equal pay for equal work‟ can be granted only if it was demonstrated that the State has practised invidious discrimination by prescribing two different pay scales for two different classes of employees without reasonable classification. The onus was on the employee and the principle of „equal pay for equal work‟ cannot be enforced in abstract. Several other cases were referred to come to the conclusion that educational qualification could be and constitute a valid classification for higher pay scale, though it was the contention that all employees in the post were performing same functions and duties. In such cases it was held that doctrine of „equal pay for equal work‟ may not be invoked.
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - S Khanna - Full Document

Chinnathambi And Ors. vs P.O., Labour Court And Anr. on 12 November, 1999

37. The equal pay for equal work is not an abstract doctrine, as held in Mewa Ram Kanojia v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Ors., (supra). The doctrine of equal pay for equal work is applicable only where the employees are equal in every respect, but not when they are denied 'equality based on reasonable classification in as much as equality must be among the equals and unequals cannot claim equality.
Madras High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 0 - P D Premkumar - Full Document

T.R.Kannan vs The Registrar

42.8. If the qualifications for Page No.70/82 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD).No.24819/2018..etc Batch of 2020 recruitment to the subject post vis-à-vis the reference post are different, it may be difficult to conclude that the duties and responsibilities of the posts are qualitatively similar or comparable (see Mewa Ram Kanojia case [Mewa Ram Kanojia v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, (1989) 2 SCC 235 : 1989 SCC (L&S) 329] and State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy [State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy, (2004) 1 SCC 347 : 2004 SCC (L&S) 225] ). In such a case the principle of “equal pay for equal work” cannot be invoked.
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - N A Venkatesh - Full Document

T.R.Kannan vs The Registrar

42.8. If the qualifications for recruitment to the subject post vis-à-vis the Page No.71/84 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD).No.24819/2018..etc Batch of 2020 reference post are different, it may be difficult to conclude that the duties and responsibilities of the posts are qualitatively similar or comparable (see Mewa Ram Kanojia case [Mewa Ram Kanojia v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, (1989) 2 SCC 235 : 1989 SCC (L&S) 329] and State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy [State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy, (2004) 1 SCC 347 : 2004 SCC (L&S) 225] ). In such a case the principle of “equal pay for equal work” cannot be invoked.
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - N A Venkatesh - Full Document

S.Muthu Kumar vs The Registrar on 21 January, 2025

42.8. If the qualifications for recruitment to the subject post vis-à-vis the reference post are different, it may be difficult to conclude that the duties and responsibilities of the posts are qualitatively similar or comparable (see Mewa 39 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 12:35:02 pm ) W.A.NO.898 of 2021 etc. batch Ram Kanojia case [Mewa Ram Kanojia v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, (1989) 2 SCC 235 : 1989 SCC (L&S) 329] and State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy [State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy, (2004) 1 SCC 347 : 2004 SCC (L&S) 225] ). In such a case the principle of “equal pay for equal work” cannot be invoked.
Madras High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - A Sumanth - Full Document

S.Muthu Kumar vs The Registrar on 21 January, 2025

42.8. If the qualifications for recruitment to the subject post vis-à-vis the reference post are different, it may be difficult to conclude that the duties and responsibilities of the posts are qualitatively similar or comparable (see Mewa Ram Kanojia case [Mewa Ram Kanojia v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, (1989) 2 SCC 235 : 1989 SCC (L&S) 329] and State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy [State of W.B. v. Tarun K. Roy, (2004) 1 SCC 347 : 2004 SCC (L&S) 225] ). In such a case the principle of “equal pay for equal work” cannot be invoked.
Madras High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - A Sumanth - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next