Judgment:
S. Muralidhar, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13.7.1999 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing CW No. 1272 of 1986, filed by the appellants herein seeking the following reliefs:
to issue appropriate writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions:
(i) declaring the petitioners entitled to the scale of Rs. 840-1200 with effect from 1.1.1973 or alternatively to at least to the scale of Rs. 650-1200 with effect from 1.1.1973 and/or still alternatively to the scale of Rs. 840-1200 (Grade I) and Rs. 650-1040 (Grade II) with effect from 1.1.1973 to 22nd June, 1982 and to a common scale of Rs. 650-1200 with effect from 22.6.1982 with arrears of pay and other consequential benefits.
(ii) directing the respondents to pay the scales to the petitioners with effect from 1.1.1973 as mentioned in Clause (i) above with arrears of pay, allowances etc.
2. The facts of the present case are that members of the Appellant No. 1 association and Appellants Nos. 4 to 10 were employed as Section Officers either in the colleges affiliated to University of Delhi (respondent No. 1 herein) and getting grant-in-aid from the University Grants Commission (UGC) (respondent No. 2 herein) or employed as Section Officers in the University of Delhi itself. Their main grievance is that though they have been performing the same duties as Section Officers of the Government of India or of the UGC, they have been discriminated against in matter of fixation of pay scale. It is their case that as on 1.1.1973, Section Officers of the Government of India were getting a pay scale of Rs. 650-1200, and the Section Officers in the UGC in Grade-1 and Grade-II were getting the pay scales of Rs. 840-1200 and Rs. 650-960 respectively. However, the appellants who were working as Superintendents Grade I and II of the Delhi University who were performing the same duties were getting Rs. 650-960 and Rs. 550-900 respectively. Even after these appellants were re-designated as Section Officers Grades I and II with effect from 1.10.1978, their pay scales remained unchanged. In other words, while Grade I Section Officers of the UGC were getting a pay scale of Rs. 840-1200, the Grade I Section Officers of Delhi University were getting a pay scale of only Rs. 650-960. Likewise, while Grade II Section Officer of the UGC was getting a pay scale of Rs. 650-960, the Grade II Section Officer of University of Delhi was only getting pay scale of Rs. 550-900. The pay scale for the Section officers of the Government of India remained at Rs. 650-1200 with effect from 1.1.1973 and continued as such even on 1.10.1978.
3. With effect from 23.6.1982, the Section Officers of both the Government of India and the UGC were brought on par and the pay scales of both were fixed at Rs. 650-1200. The earlier split grading of Section Officers of the UGC as Grades I & II was done away with and merged into a single cadre of Section Officers. As regards the Section Officers of University of Delhi, the existing pay scales and grouping as Grade I & Grade II continued.
4. In August 1982, a committee was set up to examine the question of disparity of the pay scale in the Section Officers Grades in the University of Delhi. Consequent thereto at its meeting on 19.2.1983, the UGC approved the recommendations made by this Committee. As a result, with effect from 19.2.1983, even in the University of Delhi, there was a single cadre of Section Officers for whom the pay scale was fixed at Rs. 650-1200 on par with their counterparts in the Government of India and the UGC.
5. The present dispute, thereforee, concerns the denial to the Section Officers of the University of Delhi or its affiliated colleges pay scale on par with persons holding similar posts in the UGC for the period between 1.1.1973 and 19.2.1983.
6. To complete the factual narration, it requires to be noticed that a representation was made on 12.11.1973 by the Section Officers to the Delhi University seeking re-fixation of the pay scales on par with their counterparts in the UGC. This was considered by the Council for the University of Delhi which by a resolution dated 19.12.1973 resolved that the Superintendents in the University in the two grades i.e Grade I and Grade II be given the pay scale of Rs. 620-900 and Rs. 350-590 respectively on par with the Section Officers of the UGC and further that the designation of the post of Superintendent in the University be also changed to that of Section Officer Grade I and Grade II as prevailing in the UGC.
7. It appears that the Executive Council of the University of Delhi again passed a resolution on 10.2.1978 whereby it resolved that the UGC again be requested to approve the redesignation of the Superintendents in the University as Section Officers Grade I & Grade II and their revised pay scale on par with Section Officers in the UGC.
8. On 7.10.1978, a notification was issued by the University of Delhi by which it was announced that Executive Council of the University at its meeting held on 1.10.1978 had resolved that pending the revision of the scale of Superintendents, as proposed by the University, they be henceforth designated as Section Officers. thereforee with effect from 1.10.1978 appellants Nos 4 to 10 herein and other Superintendents working in Grade I and Grade II of the University of Delhi and its affiliated colleges, were re-designated as section Officers Grade I & Grade II.
9. By a letter dated 29.11.1978 the UGC informed the University of Delhi that it had no objection to the redesignation by the Delhi University of its Superintendents as Section Officers 'in the existing scale.'
10. It is an admitted position that although the Delhi University had proposed to the UGC that the pay scales of the Section Officers of the University of Delhi should be brought on par with their counterparts in the UGC, that request was not immediately acted upon and the UGC adopted the device for appointing a committee to look into the matter. This meant that the decision on granting parity of pay scales would inevitably be delayed. That is what in fact happened. The Committee's recommendations accepting the request for placing the Section Officers of University of Delhi on par with their counterparts in UGC was placed before the UGC on 27.1.1983 and thereafter it was decided to grant parity with effect from 19.2.1983.
11. The delay in accepting the request for grant of parity in pay scales was, in the above circumstances, clearly avoidable. The UGC had itself approved the redesignation of Superintendents of the Delhi University as Section Officers with effect from 1.10.1978. The question whether the nature and duties of the Section Officers in the University of Delhi [earlier working as Superintendent (Grade I & Grade II)] were similar to their counterparts in the UGC was no longer in issue, at least from 1.10.1978 when the redesignation took effect. We do not find anything in the counter affidavit of the UGC which suggests that the work performed by the Section Officers of the University of Delhi [earlier working as Superintendent Grade I & II)] was any different from those being performed by the Section Officers of UGC. The only Explanationn for not granting parity in pay scale is found in para 12 of UGC's counter affidavit before the learned Single Judge which reads as under:
That the University itself re-designated the post of superintendents as Section Officers and approached the UGC for the same. As may be seen from Annexure-F of the petition, the UGC expressed its no objection to the re-designation of Superintendents as Section Officers in the existing scale. It was, however, made clear that the approval did not commit the UGC to revise the scale of pay of these posts. Up-to November 1978, the scales of pay were not at par with the Government of India or with the UGC.
12. The learned Counsel for the UGC submitted before us that since the approval granted by the UGC for the change of designation of the Superintendent Grade I & Grade II of the University of Delhi as Section Officers was made subject to the express rider that such approval did not commit the UGC to revise the pay scale, the appellants herein could not be permitted to seek such parity for the period earlier than 19.2.1983 which was the date from which the UGC ultimately agreed to grant the revised pay scales. However, this self serving statement of the UGC can hardly constitute a sufficient Explanationn for UGC's conduct in denying parity earlier. This offers no rational Explanationn why such a rider was inserted in the first place which resulted in denial of pay scale to the Section Officers of University of Delhi on par with their counterparts in UGC till 19.2.1983 despite their being designated as Section Officers, with effect from 1.10.1978. Even now there is no justifiable reason for this denial when the admitted position is that the nature of the duties being performed by the Section Officers of University of Delhi were no different from that being performed by Section Officers of the UGC. It is nobody's case that the work of the Section Officers of the University of Delhi changed with effect from 19.2.1983 and was not the same as was being performed on 1.10.1978. The device of setting up of a committee in 1982 and getting its recommendations placed of the UGC on 27.1.1983, which was further considered by the UGC at its meeting on 19/20.2.1983, only shows a typical bureaucratic tactic of postponing a decision that might benefit a section of the employees. We accordingly hold that there was no justification for the denial of pay scales to the Section Officers of the Delhi University on par with their counterparts in the UGC at least from 1.10.1978, when their redesignation as Section Officers was approved by the UGC.
14. The learned Single Judge has in a lengthy judgment noticed the contentions of the parties, the pleadings and several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the question of equal pay for equal work. However, the entire reasons contained in the judgment of learned Single Judge are to be found only towards the end of the judgment in para 54 which reads as under:
The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases cited by Mr. Gourab K. Banerjee, the learned Counsel for the second respondent would apply to the facts of the instant case, and having regard to those principles, I am of the view that the petitioners cannot claim the pay scale of Rs. 650-1200 w.e.f. 1.1.1973 and what has been granted to the petitioners is absolutely in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
15. There is force in the contention of the counsel for the appellant that no reasons have been given for dismissing the writ petition. However, instead of remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge, we felt that it would be in the interests of justice to decide the question on merits since the dispute has been pending in this Court since 1986.
16. In view of the above discussion, the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge is set aside. It is declared that the appellants Nos 4 to 10 and all other Section Officers similarly placed in the University of Delhi would be entitled to pay scales on par with the Section Officers of the UGC with effect from 1.10.1978. In other words the Grade I and Grade II Section Officers of the University of Delhi would be entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 840-1200 (Grade I) and Rs. 650-960 (Grade II) respectively with effect from 1-10-1978 to 22.6.1982 and to a common pay scale of Rs. 650-1200 with effect from 22.6.1982, They would also be entitled to arrears of pay and other consequential benefits. All arrears and dues accruing due to this judgment shall be paid to the appellants on or before 15th September, 2006. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No orders as to costs.