Allowed¶49

Pandiyan @ Rajesh Babu v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC18 Mar 2025WP(MD)/7186/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

equal pay for equal work; Articles 14, 16, 39(d); Article 226 mandamus; Scavenger; special time scale of pay; regular time scale of pay Rs.4800-10000 G.P.Rs.1300; regularisation of service; Backward Class Most Backward Class Minorities Welfare Department; hostel; notional monetary benefits; State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh (2017) 1 SCC 148; Sabha Shanker Dube; W.P(MD)Nos.22370 and 22392 of 2021; Kallar Reclamation Schools; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P.(MD); Battu Devanand, J.; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued: respondents 1 to 3 directed to place the petitioner in regular time scale of pay from the date his service was regularised, notional only, with monetary benefits given effect from the date of regularisation; no costs. ¶49

Pandiyan @ Rajesh Babu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to be placed in the regular time scale of pay from the date on which his service was regularised.

¶26

Court's answer

The issue involved is covered by the common order dated 17.11.2022 in W.P(MD)Nos.22370 and 22392 of 2021; following that order, the writ petition is allowed to meet the ends of justice.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

The respondents are directed to place the petitioner in regular time scale of pay from the date when his service was regularised.

¶50-51

Key takeaways

The placement in regular time scale is made only for notional purpose, and monetary benefits are to be given effect from the date of regularisation.ratio¶52-53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India — Petitioner, employed as Scavenger in a Backward Class Welfare hostel since 2013 (appointment by proceedings of the third respondent dated 10.09.2013), service regularised in 2023 after 10 years, but drawing only special time scale of pay — Sought placement in regular time scale of pay (Rs.4800 - 10000 + G.P. Rs.1300) on par with existing Scavengers, invoking the common order dated 17.11.2022 in W.P(MD)Nos.22370 and 22392 of 2021 (rendered in line with W.P.(MD)No.17663 of 2014 decided on 25.01.2018, the dismissal of the department's W.A.(MD)No.1584 of 2018 on 29.01.2019, and the Supreme Court's decision in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148, on equal pay for equal work under Articles 14, 16 and 39(d)) — Held, the issue is squarely covered by the said common order; writ petition allowed; respondents directed to place the petitioner in regular time scale of pay from the date of regularisation of his service, notional only, with monetary benefits given effect from the date of regularisation; no costs. (Battu Devanand, J., Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 18.03.2025.)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶7

Pandiyan @ Rajesh Babu

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The State of Tamil Nadu , Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Backward Class, Most Backward Class, Minorities Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Commissioner/Director Backward Class Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶12

3.The District Backward Classes Minorities Welfare Officer, Collectorate Campus, Madurai, Madurai District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to grant regular time scale of pay in the cadre of scavenger on par with the existing Scavengers, who are receiving regular time scale of pay i.e.,Rs.4800 - 10000-G.P.Rs.1300/in the light of order made in WP(MD).No.22370 and 22392 of 2021 and consequent order passed in WP(MD).No.3322/2025 dated 05.02.2025 by this Court within a period that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶14

1/8

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajini For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing

¶20

the respondents 1 to 3 to grant regular time scale of pay in the cadre of scavenger on par with the existing Scavengers, who are receiving regular time scale of pay i.e.,Rs.4800 - 10000-G.P.Rs.1300/- in the light of order made in WP(MD).No.22370 and 22392 of 2021 and consequent order passed in WP(MD).No.3322/2025 dated 05.02.2025.

¶21

The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Scavenger in the respondent hostel in the year 2013 vide proceedings of the third respondent dated 10.09.2013. After completion of 10 years of service, in the year 2023, his service has been regularised. But he is getting only special time scale of pay. The grievance of the petitioner is that the similarly placed persons in various departments, like School Education Department are getting regular time scale of pay from the date of appointment. The petitioner sent several representations to the respondents requesting to place him in the regular time scale of pay. But it 2/8

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶24

was not considered. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶25

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

¶26

The issue to be considered in the present writ petition is to whether the petitioner is entitled for placing in regular time scale of pay from the date of service was regularised or not. In fact, the issue involved in the present writ petition is already considered by this Court on several occasions. In the Common order, dated 17.11.2022 passed by this Court in W.P(MD)Nos.22370 and 22392 of 2021 is squarely applicable to the present case. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted herein under:

¶27

“5.I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. In fact, Scavengers working in the education department sought similar relief and filed W.P.(MD)No. 17663 of 2014. The said writ petition was allowed by me on 25.01.2018 in the following terms:-

¶28

“8. This Court is of the view that the principle of equal pay for equal work enshrined in Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India is too sacred to be defeated by invoking the principle of estoppel. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in decision reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148 – State of

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

3/8

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶32

Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and others held that even temporary employees will be entitled to draw wages at the minimum of the pay scale as extended to the regular employees holding the same post. The members of the petitioner's Association are discharging the duty of Scavengers in the School Education Department but other Scavengers working in the very same department have been placed in the higher time scale of pay. This is patently discriminatory. When two employees are doing the same work, both will have to be paid the very same salary. The question of waiver will not arise in these cases. Fundamental rights cannot be waived. It has held that the right of equal pay for equal work is a fundamental right. Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India states that the State shall direct its policy towards securing that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women. Though this directive principle of State policy is more in the context of gender equity, the philosophy behind it can be applied to uphold the general principle of equal pay for equal work. This Court considering a similar issue in the case of Colleges struck down the discriminatory approach of the department. Such an order was passed on 19.09.2014 in W.P. No.7884 of 2013. Excepting that the petitioners in W.P.(MD).No. 7884 of 2013 are working in Colleges as Scavengers and the members of the petitioner's Association are working as Scavengers in schools, there is no other difference. The case of the members of the petitioner's Association therefore deserves to be allowed.

¶33

9. The offending Clause 2(i) in the impugned G.O. (Ms). No.47, School Education (R.1) Department, dated 02.03.2012 is struck down as unconstitutional. A direction shall issue to place the Scavengers who were appointed as per G.O.(Ms).No.47, School Education (R.1) Department, dated 02.03.2012 on par with the other scavengers working in Education Department and who are receiving the regular time scale of pay i.e Rs.4,800-10,000 + Grade Pay Rs. 1,300/- from the date of their appointment. The members of the petitioner's Association will be entitled to the benefit of

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

4/8

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶37

this Revision and placement in the higher pay scale notionally from the date of their appointment and with monetary effect from the date of passing of this order. The respondent is directed to issue appropriate orders in this regard within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶38

6.The department filed W.A.(MD)No.1584 of 2018. The writ

¶39

appeal was dismissed on 29.01.2019 in the following terms:-

¶40

“4. The issue raised in this Writ Petition is no longer res integra, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and Others [2017(1) SCC 148] and Sabha Shanker Dube vs. Divisional Forest Officer and others [2018(14) Scale 765].

¶41

5. There is no dispute that the Members of the Association are working as Scavengers. The Government sanctioned time scale of pay to the Scavengers appointed to work in various Government departments and in the High Court. Those Scavengers are receiving a salary of Rs. 18,843/-. However, the members of the Association were given the salary in the scale of pay of Rs. 1,300-3,000 with the Grade Pay of Rs.300/-. The Scavengers working in the other departments including the Education Department were given the pay scale of Rs.4,800 - 10,000 + Grade Pay of Rs.1,300/-. The pay structure is per se discriminatory. It violates the principle of 'Equal Pay for Equal Work'. The learned Single Judge was, therefore, justified in quashing the particular clause and directing the appellant to sanction the time scale of pay to the Scavengers, taking into account the salary of similarly placed scavengers working under the State. We do not find any error or illegality in the said order warranting interference.”

¶42

The Hon'ble Supreme Court also declined to interfere. The reasons set out in the aforesaid order are applicable to the present case also. It is relevant to note that the said order was also implemented by issuing G.O.(Ms) No.50, School Education Department, dated 08.03.2019.

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

5/8

¶45

W.P.(MD)No.7186 of 2025

¶46

7.The petitioners herein cannot be treated otherwise. They are

¶47

also doing the very same work. Merely because they are serving in Kallar Reclamation Schools which is not directly under the education department, a different yardstick cannot be applied.”

¶48