MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

No prejudice as to remuneration when nature of work same; equal pay for equal work

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1126 of 2017

Dr. Ravi Saini & another ………….Petitioners

Versus

State of Uttarakhand & others …….Respondents

Present:- Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.Yogesh Pandey, Additional C.S.C. for the State/respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
On 01.09.2017, as a last opportunity, three weeks’ time was granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit. In this matter, counter affidavit has been filed only on behalf of respondent No.4 and the remaining respondents have not filed their counter affidavit even after repeated opportunities. Now their opportunity to file counter affidavit stands closed.

2. The case of the petitioners before this Court is that they are Junior Residents working in a Government Medical College, Haldwani, District Nainital and also undergoing Post Graduation course from the same Medical College.

3. The facilities and the remuneration which are being given to the ordinary Junior Residents (those who are not undergoing Post Graduation course) are higher than those who are undergoing PG Course. This anomaly stood removed at various stages by the State Government itself and the State Government itself accepted that two sets of Junior Residents are liable to be given the same salary. Only the question of arrears which had come before this Court in WPMS No.2808 of 2016 and other connected matters, this Court had directed the respondent authorities to pay the entire arrears to the petitioners with effect from 21.11.2015. Therefore, on principle, the State Government also agrees that the nature of their duties and work performed by Junior Residents undergoing Post Graduation course and other Junior Residents (those who are not undergoing Post Graduation course) are absolutely same in nature. Therefore, there is no occasion for the State to grant a different pay scale to them. Now for the Junior Residents, the State has also given the benefit of 7th Pay Commission (which is effective from 01.01.2016) and the same is not being given to the present petitioners.

READ  SC: Divorce - Mental Cruelty

4. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have not denied that the petitioners are not liable to be given the same pay scale or the benefit of 7th Pay Commission. On the principle of equal pay for equal work and on the principle of equity, the writ petition is allowed with a direction that in case the respondents have agreed in principle to grant the benefit of 7th Pay Commission to the ordinary Junior Residents, the same shall also be extended in case of Junior Residents, who are undergoing Post Graduation course, as and when it is given to the Junior Residents.

(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 MyNation KnowledgeBase
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

READ  No interim maintenance based on arithmetical calculations
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation