Supreme CourtDivision Bench(1997) 02 SC CK 0152

Shiba Kumar Dutta and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 24 February 1997 · Citation: AIR 1998 SC 2911 : (1998) AIRSCW 2234 : (1997) 2 ALT 32 : (1997) 3 JT 453 : (1999) 1 LLJ 1123 : (1997) 2 SCALE 557 : (1997) 3 SCC 545 : (1997) SCC(L&S) 831 : (1997) 2 SCR 467 : (1997) 3 Supreme 517

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Ramaswamy, J · G. T. Nanavati, J
RESULT
dismissed
CASE NUMBER
SLP (C) No. 5081 of 1997

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 288 words
1.

Delay condoned.

2.

This SLP arises from the orders of the Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, made on June 21, 1995 in OA No. 213 of 1992 and the Review Order dated July 26, 1996.

3.

The admitted position is that the petitioners, who are working as Fitters (T & G), had sought to be fused in the category of, and to be on par with, Jig Borers. They sought equal pay on par with them. They contend that they were drawing higher pay-scales than the Fitter; instead of elevating their cadre and placing them in the Higher pay-scales, they have been brought them down in the category as a Fitter after removing the two nomenclatures. Thereby, it is arbitrary on account of invidious discrimination. The Third Pay Commission had gone into that aspect of the matter and fixed the scales of pay. Thereafter, admittedly, Expert Classification Committee and Anomalies Removal Committee had also gone into the matter and made distinction between them. Subsequently, nomenclature of all of them were removed and fused into one category, namely, Fitter. Nomenclature and fitment is one of executive policy of the Government. Unless the action is arbitrary or there is invidious discrimination between persons similarly situated, doing same type of work, as is pointed out, it would be difficult for the Courts to go into the question of equation of posts or fitment into a particular scale of pay. They must be left to be decided by the Expert Committees and Government. The Courts cannot go into them and evaluate the job criteria and scales of pay prescribed for each category. Under those circumstances, the Tribunal is justified in refusing to go into the question.

4.

The SLP is accordingly dismissed.