Hariom Parashar & Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs :

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is working on the post of Male Nurse in the Jail Department. The petitioner had represented the matter that as the nature of duty which the petitioner is performing is akin to the nature of the work which is being done by the nurses in the health department, they should be given same treatment and same emoluments. The said representation was decided by the impugned order dated 18.03.2016 (Annexure P/1) by holding that as per Brahmaswaroop Committee, the decision was made to pay advance increments to the nurses of the health department, therefore they are being granted such relief. As there is no such policy decision for the nurses of the jail department, therefore it cannot be extended. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petition has been filed.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that as the service conditions of both the nurses of jail department and the health department are different, therefore, they could not be given equal treatment. It is submitted that nature of work, service condition, recruitment rules, pay revision rules and in all the rules, the pay scale, nature of work, qualification, recruitment condition, all are different, therefore they cannot be treated similarly. Therefore, the authorities have rightly passed the impugned order, rejecting the representation of the petitioners.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is not the case that the petitioners are having lesser qualification than those of the nurses who are working in the health department. Counsel for the petitioners has invited attention of this court towards the rules filed by the State along with the return, in which it is found that the nurses who are appointed in the health department are having the same kind of qualification as of the nurses appointed in the jail department. However, from bare perusal of the rules, it is found that in the jail department the qualification is (1) High School Examination under 10+2 system or Higher Secondary under old system. (2) Fully trained nurse, three years general nursing training in men, women and children, registered with Nurses Registration Council (Part A), capable of managing a jail hospital. Preference given to a trained compounder or a person who has undergone a three month emergency nursing course and for health department the qualification is (1) BSC (Nursing) or General Nursing and trained Senior Midwifery Science (Senior Midwifery) as well as registered with Mahakoshal Nursing Council for registered Nurse/Midwife, therefore, it cannot be gathered that the qualifications are the same.

From bare perusal of the rules relied by the petitioner for Madhya Pradesh Class-III (Ministerial and Non-Ministerial) Jail Services Recruitment Rules, 1974 provides a post of male nurse having pay scale which is mentioned therein and similarly, for health department rules, namely Madhya Pradesh Public Health and Family Welfare Department (Directorate of Health Services) Class-III, Nurses Service Recruitment Rules, 1989 contains some different pay scales for the post of staff nurse. Therefore, from the pay scale also, it cannot be gathered that both the pay scales of the nurses of jail department and the health department are the same.

The Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh, Through Secretary Department of Jail/Home, Bhopal & ors. vs. Rajesh Kumar Shukla (W.A.No.930/2010 decided on 12.10.2017) has held that the doctrine of equal pay for equal work would not be applicable even if the employees in two groups are doing identical work, unless there is complete and wholesale identity between them. The same can be invoked only when the employees are similarly situated. The relevant paragraph is reproduced hereunder :

In view of the above enunciation of law and upon perusal of the recruitment rules of both the nurses, this Court is of the considered opinion that the qualification and pay-scale of both the nurses working in jail department and health department are different. The nature of work, as pointed out by the respondent in the return, is also different, therefore, as per the principle laid down by the Division Bench of this court, both the posts cannot be equated for the purpose of extending monetary benefits. Therefore, if the policy decision has been taken by the State government by granting any benefit to the nurses of the health department that cannot automatically be applied to the nurses of the jail department. If the policy decision is taken by the State government for extending similar kind of benefit to the nurses of the jail department that is up to the State government to amend the rules or apply the recommendations of the committees in the pay-revision rules.

Therefore, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot direct the State to make such an amendment or extend the monetary benefit which have not been resolved by the Committee or amend rules to a particular set of employees.

Accordingly, the petition sans merit and is hereby dismissed.