Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Equal Pay for Equal Work - Pay Scale Parity and Pay Commission's Recommendations Upheld by Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision , the Supreme Court of India upheld the Delhi High Court's ruling that granted pay scale parity to employees of the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) headquarters with their counterparts in the Central Secretariat Service (CSS). The bench, comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, dismissed an appeal by the Union of India, emphasizing the importance of historical parity and adherence to the recommendations of the VIth Central Pay Commission.

Join us on WhatsApp .

In their judgement, the apex court noted, "The High Court has not undertaken the exercise regarding which restraint has been expressed by this Court. However, on the admitted facts and the earlier situation which existed, a consideration has been made keeping in view the very recommendation of the Pay Commission in reckoning the appropriate application of the pay scale."

This decision marks a significant recognition of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work.' The court observed that there was a clear historical precedent of parity in pay scales between the employees of OFB and those in similar positions within the CSS. The Supreme Court further clarified, "In view of the above, the appeal being devoid of merit, stands dismissed with no order as to costs."

The case, which hinged on the interpretation of the VIth Central Pay Commission's recommendations, highlights the nuanced approach the judiciary must take in matters of pay scale disparity. The bench underscored the judicial restraint required in such matters but acknowledged the necessity to intervene in cases of palpable discrimination or arbitrariness.

Representing the appellants, Mr. R. Bala Subramanian argued the limited scope of judicial review in matters of pay scale fixation. Conversely, Ms. Kiran Suri, representing the respondents, emphasized the historical parity and the unjust treatment meted out to OFB employees.

The judgement also referenced several past decisions, including "Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association and Another (2023) SCC Online SC 173" and "Union of India vs. Dineshan K.K. (2008) 1 SCC 586," to reinforce its stance.

This ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for similar cases of pay disparity in various government sectors, reinforcing the role of historical parity and Pay Commission guidelines in determining pay scales.

Date of Decision: 09 November  2023

Union of India & Ors. VS D.G.O.F. Employees Association and Anr.

Latest Legal News