Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.31 seconds)S.C.Chandra & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 21 August, 2007
In any event, this Court is of the view that it is unnecessary to go into the merits of the claim and it is suffice to state that apart from the non-maintainability of the writ petitions and in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of S.C. Chandra v. State of Jharkhand,(2007) 8 SCC 279 referred above, this Court is unable to grant the relief prayed for by the petitioners. All the writ petitions stand dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions stand dismissed.
State Of Haryana And Anr vs Tilak Raj And Ors on 14 July, 2003
27. Thus, in State of Haryana v. Tilak Raj (2003) 6 SCC 123 : 2003 SCC (L&S) 828 it was held that the principle can only apply if there is complete and wholesale identity between the two groups. Even if the employees in the two groups are doing identical work they cannot be granted equal pay if there is no complete and wholesale identity e.g. a daily-rated employee may be doing the same work as a regular employee, yet he cannot be granted the same pay scale. Similarly, two groups of employees may be doing the same work, yet they may be given different pay scales if the educational qualifications are different. Also, pay scale can be different if the nature of jobs, responsibilities, experience, method of recruitment, etc. are different.
State Of Haryana & Ors vs Charanjit Singh & Ors., Etc. Etc on 5 October, 2005
In State of Haryana v. Charanjit Singh (2006) 9 SCC 321, discussing a large number of earlier decisions it was held by a three-Judge Bench of this Court that the principle of equal pay for equal work cannot apply unless there is complete and wholesale identity between the two groups. Moreover, even for finding out whether there is complete and wholesale identity, the proper forum is an expert body and not the writ court, as this requires extensive evidence. A mechanical interpretation of the principle of equal pay for equal work creates great practical difficulties. Hence in recent decisions the Supreme Court has considerably watered down the principle of equal pay for equal work and this principle has hardly been ever applied in recent decisions.
.....
State Of Haryaka And Anr vs Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal ... on 10 July, 2002
37. Similarly, in State of Haryana v. Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Assn.(2002) 6 SCC 72 : 2002 SCC (L&S) 822 the principle of equal pay for equal work was considered in great detail. In paras 9 and 10 of the said judgment the Supreme Court observed that equation of posts and salary is a complex matter which should be left to an expert body. The courts must realise that the job is both a difficult and time consuming task which even experts having the assistance of staff with requisite expertise have found it difficult to undertake. Fixation of pay and determination of parity is a complex matter which is for the executive to discharge.
Union Of India And Others vs Pradip Kumar Dey on 9 November, 2000
Granting of pay parity by the court may result in a cascading effect and reaction which can have adverse consequences vide Union of India v. Pradip Kumar Dey (2000) 8 SCC 580 : 2001 SCC (L&S) 56."
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 37 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
K.Marappan vs The Deputy Registrar Of Co-Operative ... on 29 September, 2006
5. This Court is unable to agree with the statement made by the learned Judge. If there is an infringement of a fundamental right and such infringement or a complaint of equal pay for equal work involves enforcement of fundamental right, the writ petition is maintainable. On the other hand, the question of equal pay for equal work is only enshrined under Article 39-d of the Constitution, which is only a directive principles of State Policy and such directive principles under Article 37 are held to be not enforceable by this Court. However, the principles laid down are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making the laws. Therefore, the Larger Bench judgment of this Court Marappan's case referred surpa will squarely apply on the question of maintainability of the grievance is projected by the petitioner. It is not as if the employees are helpless.