Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Equal Pay for Equal Work for Temporary Nurses in AIIMS: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 05 October 2023, In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has upheld the principle of “equal pay for equal work” for temporary nurses working at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). The judgment, delivered on October 5, 2023, sets a precedent for ensuring fair compensation to temporary employees who perform duties equivalent to their regular counterparts.

The Hon’ble Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta delivered the judgment, emphasizing the importance of recognizing the valuable service provided by hospital nurses and the need to ensure equitable compensation.

The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s precedent in the case of Jagjit Singh (2017) 1 SCC 148, which established that employees engaged in similar work cannot be paid less than regular employees. The principle of “equal pay for equal work” applies to all employees, whether engaged on a regular or temporary basis.

The court highlighted the critical role played by nurses In hospitals, stating, “Nurses working in hospitals provide a very valuable humanitarian service; their duties are manifold… It would be a travesty of justice if such people are denied adequate compensation for their services.”

As a result of this judgment, the petitioners, who were temporary nurses at AIIMS, will now be entitled to receive wages at the minimum of the pay scale applicable to regular employees, along with Dearness Allowance. The order also specifies that this entitlement is effective from the date of filing the Original Application (OA), without interest.

The decision comes after a long-standing legal battle, with the High Court setting aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, which had dismissed the petitioners’ claims for equal pay.

This ruling not only ensures fair remuneration for temporary nurses but also sets a precedent for similar cases involving temporary employees across various sectors. It underscores the commitment to uphold the dignity and rights of employees engaged in vital roles within organizations.

Representing the petitioners, Ms. Kamlakshi Singh and Ms. Divya Chawla, Advocates, argued passionately for equal pay, citing the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. On the other hand, Mr. Tanveer Oberoi, Advocate for AIIMS, contended that the principle of equal pay should not be translated into a mathematical formula and that the burden of proving parity lies with the employees.

With this judgment, the Delhi High Court has taken a significant step towards ensuring fair wages and equal treatment for temporary employees, setting a precedent for equity in the workplace.

Date of Decision: October 05, 2023

SITA MUNDU & ANR  vs ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL  SCIENCES        

Latest Legal News