The Nagpur Bench of city judicature recently laid-off a clutch of petitions by Minimum competence line of work Course (MCVC) instructors claiming pay scale at par with the regular lecturers on the principle of “Equal get hold of Equal Work” below Article fourteen of the Constitution of Asian country (Gajanan Ghule & Anr. v. State of geographic area and connected petitions).
The Bench of Justices SB Shukre and Rb Deonoted that the belief of “Equal get hold of Equal Work” isn’t abstract and doesn’t operate during a vacuum. “The principle ‘Equal get hold of Equal Work’ isn’t a elementary right however a constitutional goal,” the Court aforesaid.
They declared that title to parity in pay scale would rely on many factors like academic qualifications, nature of the duty, duties to be performed, responsibilities to be discharged, and skill.
“Designation of posts can’t be the only real basis for comparison,” the Court aforesaid. The petitioners, UN agency ar instructors from the MCVC teaching category XI and XII at schools in few districts of geographic area, claimed that their work was of a similar nature because the regular lecturers UN agency additionally instructed those courses with a similar or similar level of degrees.
Maharashtra government argued that the tutorial qualifications, expertise prescribed, the character of labor, and also the accomplishment rules being totally different, regular instructors can’t be treated at par with regular lecturers.
The Court was additionally conversant of a report of a Commissioner appointed by the commercial Court Akola that recorded that the proof on record disclosed that the work, duties, and responsibilities appointed to the regular teacher and regular teacher ar totally different.
The Bench avoided creating any observations on the analysis of posts considering it had been a fancy exercise that may embody thought of many factors unless the choice of the manager was malafide.