JAIPAL & OTHERS versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JAIPAL & OTHERS versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

There is no substantial difference in the nature of duties between instructors and squad teachers; both perform similar work under the same employer. The constitutional obligation under Article 39(d) mandates equal pay for equal work, and differences in recruitment, transferability, or employment nature do not justify pay discrimination. Petitioners are entitled to the same pay scale as squad teachers, but not regularization due to the temporary nature of their scheme.

Parties
Petitioner: Jaipal & Others; Respondent: State of Haryana & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 June 1988
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Final Disposition
Outcome
Petitions partly allowed.
Legal Topics
Equal Pay for Equal Work, Discrimination in Employment, Directive Principles of State Policy, Temporary and Permanent Employment
Constitutional Law Labour Law Education Law Equal Pay for Equal Work Discrimination in Employment Directive Principles of State Policy Temporary and Permanent Employment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaipal & Others

Petitioner

State of Haryana & Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether instructors under Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme are entitled to pay parity with squad teachers under State Social Education Scheme.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of 'equal work equal pay' applies to temporary/casual employees performing similar duties as permanent employees.

Ratio Decidendi

There is no substantial difference in the nature of duties between instructors and squad teachers; both perform similar work under the same employer. The constitutional obligation under Article 39(d) mandates equal pay for equal work, and differences in recruitment, transferability, or employment nature do not justify pay discrimination. Petitioners are entitled to the same pay scale as squad teachers, but not regularization due to the temporary nature of their scheme.

Court Disposition

Petitions partly allowed.

Orders

  • Petitioners' salary to be fixed in the same scale as squad teachers; pay fixed from initial appointment date, ignoring breaks caused by six-month appointments; increments allowed as per law, regardless of service break; implementation effective from September 1, 1985; claim for regularization rejected; costs...