High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 04 UK CK 0050

Surendra Singh Suriyal vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 8 April 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj K. Tiwari, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 3619 Of 2018

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

9 paragraphs · 606 words

Manoj K. Tiwari, J

1.

Petitioner is serving as Lab Technician in Beer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government Medical, Science & Research Institute, Srinagar (in short 'Institute') since 10.08.2010. According to the petitioner, his work and conduct has been found to be satisfactory and there is no complaint or adverse material against him and he is working in the Institute continuously ever since he was appointed.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is being paid a meager amount as remuneration each month, while Lab Technician, who were regularly appointed, are being paid more than Rs.30,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is performing same duties and his responsibilities, working hours are also the same as that of a regular Lab Technician, therefore, paying less amount as remuneration to the petitioner is violative of principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & others Vs Jagjit Singh & others reported in 2017 (1) SCC 148.

4.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.08.2018 passed by the Principal of the Institute, whereby petitioner's claim for equal pay for equal work was rejected. The ground taken for rejecting petitioner's claim is that he was appointed without holding any selection and he has been appointed in the absence of any sanctioned post. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are around 300 persons identically placed as the petitioner in the Institute and out of those, more than 100 persons are being paid minimum of pay pursuant to the order passed by this Court.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Lab Technicians, who were appointed with the petitioner by a common order, have also been given minimum of pay scale and this aspect has been ignored by respondent No. 4, while rejecting petitioner's claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment dated 29.11.2017 rendered by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No. 2761 of 2017, whereby a direction was issued to pay minimum of pay scale for the post of Lab. Technician. He further submits that Special Appeal No. 398 of 2018, filed by the State Government against the said judgment, too was dismissed by Division Bench of this Court by imposing cost of Rs.1,00,000/- on the State Government. Thereafter, SLP preferred by the State Government before Hon'ble Supreme Court was also dismissed, vide order dated 02.11.2018, however, the amount of cost was reduced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.10,000/-.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 2.01.2019 in the case of Smt. Madhuri Baloni (Kothari) Vs State of Uttarakhand & others in WPSS No. 4378 of 2018 (decided along with WPSS No. 4375 of 2018), has directed the Competent Authority to pay minimum of pay scale to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Smt. Madhuri Baloni (Kothari) is also serving as Lab Technician in the same Institute.

7.

Having regard to the above facts, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met, if respondent No. 4 is directed to re-consider petitioner's claim for equal pay for equal work.

8.

Accordingly, impugned order dated 16.08.2018 is quashed. Respondent No. 4 is directed to re-consider petitioner's claim in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court in WPSS No. 4378 of 2018 and pass speaking order, in accordance with law, within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.