MANU/PH/0645/1991

Equivalent Citation: (1993)ILR 1Punjab and Haryana237, (1993)ILR 1Punjab and Haryana237, 1993(1)RC R(C riminal)678, 1992(1)SC T574(P&H),
1992(1)SLR614

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Civil Writ Petition No. 12969 of 1991
Decided On: 03.12.1991
Appellants: Krishan Lal Sehgal and Ors.
Vs.
Respondent: State of Haryana and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
V.K. Bali and Amrit Lal Bahri, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: K.G. Chaudhry, Adv.
For Respondents/Defendant: Mani Ram, Adv.
Case Note:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 16--Equal pay for equal work--Employees
either working at office of District Public Relations Office in State of Haryana
or in Rural Community Theatres--Nature of duties similar--Employees at Urban
Centres and those at rural centres have same employer-No distinction in
nature of duties between two sets of employees can be made out--Action
denying equal pay is discriminatory and violative of Article 14.
Held, that the Petitioners are holding the same posts in the office of District
Public Relations Officer in the State of Haryana as are being held by their
counter-parts in Rural Community Theatre. The very nature of jobs suggests
that it has to be of the same kind. The distinction sought to be made out by
the Respondents and which has been noticed above is not justified to deny
the pay scales to the Petitioners which are given to the persons working in
the Rural Community Theatre. The action denying the equal pay to the
Petitioners is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India.
Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying
that, the following reliefs may kindly be granted to the Petitioners:
(i) That a Writ of Certiorari may be issued quashing the impugned order
passed on the representation of the Petitioners (Annexure P-1).
(ii) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus may kindly be issued in favour of
the Petitioners and against the Respondents directing the Respondents to
grant the same pay scale to the Petitioners with effect from 1st January,
1986 as has been granted to the members of the Rural Community Theatre
who are working in the same Department and are performing similar type of
duties.
(iii) That a Writ in the nature of Mandamus may be issued directing the

05-09-2021 (Page 1 of 4) www.manupatra.com CNLU STUDENT

Respondents to release the arrears of revised pay scale with effect from 1st
January, 1986 and to pay the same with interest to the Petitioners forthwith.
(iv) That any other appropriate Writ. Order or Direction as this Hon'ble Court
thinks just and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be issued,
(v) That filing of certified copies of Annexure and issuance of advance notices
on the Respondents may kindly be dispensed with in the interest of justice,
equity and fair play.
(vi) That the cost of the Writ Petition may also be awarded to the Petitioners.
JUDGMENT
V.K. Bali, J.
1 . In this second bout of litigation, the Petitioners who are Actors, Stage Masters,
Harmonium Masters and Tabla Masters and are employees of the Department of Public
Relations, Haryana elamour for the same pay as is being given to the persons on the
same posts and in the same very department in Rural Community Theatre and who are
performing the same and similar kind of duties. The grievance is of discrimination
against the State of Haryana for not following the doctrine of 'equal work equal pay'.
Necessary facts need to be noticed first.
2. Petitioners are working in the office of District Public Relations Officer in the State of
Haryana as Actors, Stage Masters, Harmonium Masters and Tabla Masters in the pay
scale of Rs. 950-1,400. The members of Rural Community Theatre in the same very
department who were working on the same posts as the Petitioners are, under the same
employer have their pay scales fixed at Rs. 1,400-2,600. For removing the disparity in
the pay scales, the Petitioners through their Associations made number of
representations to the Respondents but when the same were cold shouldered they had
no choice but to take up the matter in this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No. 891 of
1991. The matter came up for hearing before a Division Bench and,-vide order, dated
January 18, 1991, a direction was issued to the Respondents to decide the
representations of the Petitioners within three months. The representation having been
decided against the Petitioners,-vide order, dated May 13, 1991, the Petitioners per
necessity have approached this Court for the second time. The posts of the Petitioners
are of technical nature and they require more skill, manual labour and time to perform
their duties as compared to their counter-parts in the Rural Community Theatre. The
Petitioners are the members of drama party. They stage their shows to entertain the
public at the District Level, State Level, National Level and International Level whereas
the members of Rural Community Theatre stage their shows to entertain the public only
in rural areas within the District. It is the case of the Petitioners that they had staged
their shows to entertain the people on behalf of the State of Haryana in Asiad 82 at
Delhi as well as in "Apna Ustav" 1986. Besides, they also staged their shows in various
States from time to time like Bombay, Ladakh, Mizoram, Goa and Nagaland. Although
the members of Rural Community Theatre have duties confined in the rural area of the
District yet they were being given the pajy scale of Rs. 1,400-2,600. The Petitioners
further contend that the very nature of duties that are performed by them show that
they are required to possess particular type of skill as the words Actors, Harmonium
Masters, Stage Masters and Tabla Masters themselves indicate whereas similar persons
employed on the same posts in Rural Community Theatre are not required to possess
particular type of skill they may put them at higher level. The only distinction between
the two is that whereas the Petitioners stage their shows at State Level, National Level

05-09-2021 (Page 2 of 4) www.manupatra.com CNLU STUDENT

and International Level, the persons employed in Rural Community Theatre stage their
shows at District Level, That being the position, if the Petitioners are not entitled to
higher pay scale than that of persons employed in Rural Community Theatre, they are at
least entitled to equal pay. The representation as ordered to be decided by this Court
was rejected on the ground that prior to revision in the pay scales with effect from
January 1, 1986. Harmonium Master, Tabla Master, Stage Master and Actors were
drawing pay scale of Rs. 400-600 whereas the pre-revised scale of artists working in
the Rural Community Theatre was higher i.e. Rs. 525-900 as also the duties/mode of
recruitment and minimum qualifications are quite different in the case of the Petitioners
and the persons employed on the same posts in Rural Community Theatre. It is for
these two reasons, as referred to above, that the representation of the Petitioners was
rejected.
3 . The Writ Petition has been opposed and it has been mainly averred in the written
statement that the posts held by the Petitioners are not of technical nature but can be
termed as skilled one. Further it is the case of the Respondents that persons working in
Rural Community Theatre were not recruited directly but were in fact recommended by
the Subordinate Services Selection Board for their appointment as Tabla Performer and
Harmonium Performer and that the posts of Rural Community Theatre and drama parties
are not interchangeable. It is further the case of the Respondents that the persons
employed in the drama parties have to perform basically within the district and they
only give drama shows whereas the Rural Community Theatre is set up by the
Department for the Article performances which have nothing to do with the drama
shows. It is on the aforesaid count that the nature of duties of the two sets of
employees is said to be different.
4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, We are of the considered view that
this petition has merit and, therefore, must succeed. It is not disputed that both the sets
of employees either working at the office of District Public Relations Officer in the State
of Haryana or Rural Community Theatre are performing the same kind of duties. Both
the sets of employees have the same employer. The fact that one set of employees is
performing in the rural areas in the district at the district level whereas the other set of
employees is performing in the districts or at State Level Functions; no distinction in
the nature of duties could possibly be made out. While considering the principle of
equal pay for equal work, it is not necessary to find out similarity by mathematical
formula but there must be a reasonable similarity in the nature of work, performance of
duties, the qualification and the quality of work performed by them and it is not
permissible to have classification in services particularly for the purpose of pay scales.
Even though the principle of equal pay for equal work has not assumed or has been
expressly declared by the Constitution as fundamental right but in view of the Directive
Principles of State Policy as contained in Article 39(d) of the Constitution "equal pay for
equal work" has assumed the status of fundamental right in service jurisprudence
having regard to the constitutional mandate of equality in Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India. In "Bhagwan Dass and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors."
MANU/SC/0612/1987 : A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 2049, it was held that once the nature and
functions and the work of two persons are not shown to be dis-similar the fact that the
recruitment was made in one way or the other would hardly be relevant from the point
of view of "equal pay for equal work" doctrine. Even though the case of the Petitioners
is that they were recruited in the same manner as their counter-parts in Rural
Community Theatre yet even if it is not so and the mode of recruitment in two wings in
the same department is from a different source, that would not provide a valid ground
for making any distinction with regard to pay scales of two sets of employees. In
identical facts when the Staff Artistes of Doordarshan claimed equal pay as their

05-09-2021 (Page 3 of 4) www.manupatra.com CNLU STUDENT

counterparts in Film Division were getting, the Supreme Court in "Y.K. Mehta and Ors.
v. Union of India and Anr." MANU/SC/0578/1988 : A.I.R. 1988 S.C. 1970. held that the
Directive Principles contained in Part IV of the Constitution, though not enforceable by
any Court, are intended to be implemented by the State of its own accord so as to
promote the welfare of the people. The Principle of "equal pay for equal work", if not
given effect to in the case of one set of Government servants holding same or similar
posts, possessing same qualifications and doing the same kind of work, as another set
of Government servants, it would be discriminatory and violative of Article 16 of the
Constitution.
5 . As referred to above, the Petitioners are holding the same posts in the office of
District Public Relations Officer in the State of Haryana as are being held by their
counter-parts in Rural Community Theatre. The very nature of jobs suggests that it has
to be of the same kind. The distinction sought to be made out by the Respondents and
which has been noticed above is not. justified to deny the pay-scales to the Petitioners
which are given to the persons working in the Rural Community Theatre. The action
denying the equal pay to the Petitioners is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India.
6 . In view of what has been observed above, order Annexure PI,-vide which the
representation of the Petitioners was rejected is set aside and a direction is issued to
the Respondents to grant to the Petitioners pay scales of Rs. 1,400-2,600 with effect
from the date the same were paid to the employees on the same or equivalent posts in
Rural Community Theatre. The arrears that may be due must be paid within a period of
three months from today. This Writ Petition succeeds but with no order as to costs.

© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

05-09-2021 (Page 4 of 4) www.manupatra.com CNLU STUDENT