BAJRANG BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. P. Mohapatra, C. J. I. The short question that arises for determination in this case is whether the principle 'equal pay for equal work' is applicable to the case of the appellants? Their claim having been rejected by the learned single Judge by judg ment dated 27-9-1991 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13343 of 1989, they filed this appeal challenging the said judgment.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case, sans unnecessary details, may be stated thus: Both the appellants, Dr. Bajrang Bahadur Singh and Dr. Arun Kumar Misra, were appointed as Demonstrators in Lal Bahadur Shastri State Homeopathic Medi cal College, Allahabad, which is an educa tional institution owned, controlled and managed by the State Government since 1981. THE petitioner-appellants claimed salary as Lecturers on the sole ground that they have been teaching students since 11-12-1981 as the posts of lecturers in the in stitution were vacant. Several documents have been annexed to the writ petition to show that the appellants were teaching stu dents regularly and occasionally they were appointed as paper setters and external ex aminers also. In some of the corropondence of the principal, they have been described as Lecturers (Annexures 2-C and 2-E ). In the circumstances, according to the appellants, they are entitled to the salary of Lecturers since 11-12-1981. THE claim is based on the principle of equal pay for equal work'.

(3.) AT the commencement of his argu ment Sri S. P. Gupta, senior Advocate ap pearing for the appellants, made it clear that the appellants are neither claiming in this case appointment to the post of Lecturer, nor are they claiming the scale of pay of Lecturer, nor are they contending that the two posts (Demonstrator and lecturer) should be equated with each other. All that they claim, submitted Sri Gupta, is that since they have been doing teaching work since December 1981, which is the job of a Lecturer, they should be paid the differen tial amount in the salary of the two posts. It is relevant to note here that in the writ petition or in the affidavits filed in the case, the petitioner appellants have not made any attempt to show that the Demonstrators in the institution discharge similar duties and bear similar responsibilities as Lecturers.