Two Categories Of Posts Do Not Necessarily Enjoy Same Pay Scales Merely Because Their Further Channel Of Promotion Is Same: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has recently ruled that just because two positions share a common path for advancement doesn't mean they should have the same pay scale and factors such as separate governing Rules, varying modes of recruitment, distinct qualifications, and unique job profiles should be considered.

Each position deserves compensation based on its own merits, rather than simply based on the common promotion path, it clarified.

The observations were made by Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua while hearing a plea in terms of which the petitioner had staked his claim to the higher pay scale of Rs.13500-16800/-. Petitioner had also prayed for quashing of the minutes of Service Committee Meeting of respondents No.1 and 2-Corporation whereby his claim for this pay scale was rejected.

The petitioner in this case was appointed as a Chemist in a corporation and was subsequently promoted to the positions of Manager Production and Production Manager. The post of Production Manager was a feeder channel post for further promotion to the post of General Manager. Another post, Chief Finance Officer, was also a feeder category post for promotion to the post of General Manager. Both the Production Manager and Chief Finance Officer positions were initially in the same pay scale of Rs.10025-15100/-.

However, the Chief Finance Officer was granted a higher pay scale of Rs.13500-16800/- while the petitioner, who was also in a feeder category post, did not receive the same pay scale. The petitioner's case for a higher pay scale was recommended by the corporation but was turned down by by the Service Committee which constrained him to file the plea.

The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the posts of Production Manager and Chief Finance Officer were the feeder category posts for promotion to the post of General Manager and were in the same pay scale of Rs.10025-15100/-. Once the pay scale of Sh. R.S. Sublaik, occupying the post of Chief Finance Officer, was raised to Rs.13500-16800/-, then, it was incumbent upon the respondents to have granted the same higher pay scale to the petitioner, it was argued.

Contesting the plea the respondents argued that the posts of Production Manager and Chief Finance Officer were governed by separate set of R&P Rules and the eligibility/educational criteria and other relevant parameters for recruitment/promotion to these two feeder channels were governed by different set of rules and hence the petitioner cannot claim parity with the pay scale attached to the post of Chief Finance Officer.

After considering the rival contentions Justice Dua while Referring to Stae of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. vs. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai 2009 observed that mere similarity of designation or similarity in quantum of work was not determinative of equality in the matter of pay scales. The Court has to consider all relevant factors such as the mode of recruitment, qualifications for the post, nature of work, value of work, responsibilities involved and various other factors.

Observing that the equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the Executive and not of the Judiciary, the bench reiterated that the Courts should not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to the expert bodies like the Pay Commissions which undertake rigorous exercise for job evaluation after taking into consideration several factors like the nature of work, the duties, accountability and responsibilities attached to the posts etc while undertaking such exercises.

"It may be true that the nature of work involved in two posts may sometimes appear to be more or less similar, however, if the classification of posts and determination of pay scale have reasonable nexus with the objective or purpose sought to be achieved, namely, the efficiency in the administration, the Pay Commissions would be justified in recommending and the State would be justified in prescribing different pay scales for the seemingly similar posts", the bench underscored.

Applying the said position of law to the case at hand the bench observed that the posts of Production Manager and Chief Finance Officer are two separate category of posts in the respondent-Corporation snd these two categories of posts are governed by separate set of R&P Rules. In terms of these rules, the educational criteria and age requirement for the two sets of posts are all different. The promotion/recruitment to the posts of Production Manager and Chief Finance Officer is also governed by separate and distinct criteria. Therefore, just because at one point of time, both these posts were in the same pay scale of Rs.10025-15100/- would not mean that these posts are required to be maintained in the same pay scale for all times to come, the bench reasoned.

"When two categories of posts, governed by separate R&P Rules, different modes of recruitment, different qualifications and different job profiles, it is then not necessary that they are to enjoy the same pay scales only on the ground that their further channel of promotion is same, i.e. the post of General Manager", the bench highlighted.

In view of the said legal position the bench found the petition devoid of any merit and dismissed the same.

Case Title: Ramesh Chand Verma Vs H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 28

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment