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

Seniority Must Reflect in Pay, Not Just in Position: Calcutta High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that underscores the importance of equitable pay in government services, the High Court at Calcutta has set a precedent by addressing a long-standing pay anomaly issue. The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, while delivering the judgment in the case of Uday Sankar Das Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors., emphasized, “Seniority must reflect in pay, not just in position,” offering a new ray of hope to government employees facing similar disparities.

The petitioner, Uday Sankar Das, a retired 'Process Server', challenged the disparity in pay compared to his junior, citing Rule 55(4) of the West Bengal Service Rules, Part-I. The rule stipulates that the pay of a senior government employee should be re-fixed at the same stage as a junior colleague if the latter draws a higher rate due to pay scale revision or under normal rules.

The court meticulously reviewed similar precedents, Including the case of Union of India & Ors. –Vs- Shri C.R. Madhava Murthy & Anr., reported in 2022 (4) Supreme 435, which resonates with the principle that seniors should not draw less pay than their juniors. Drawing parallels, Justice Chatterjee observed, “If it is found that any junior employee draws higher scale of pay than his senior of the same cadre, to remove the pay anomaly, the pay of such senior employee is required to be stepped up.”

However, the petitioner’s claim lacked direct documentary evidence comparing his service records with those of the junior colleague. Consequently, the court did not grant an immediate ruling in favor of the petitioner. Instead, Justice Chatterjee disposed of the petition with an innovative approach, granting the petitioner the liberty to submit a comprehensive representation to the learned District Judge, South 24 Parganas.

The learned District Judge Is directed to reassess the petitioner’s claim within eight weeks upon receiving the representation. This measure ensures a thorough review while providing an equitable opportunity for the petitioner to substantiate his claims.

 Date of Decision: 20.11.2023

 

Uday Sankar Das  VS The State of West bengal & Ors.

Latest Legal News