Equal pay for equal work, court fires hiring policy

The judge was hearing an appeal by Dr Anil Kumar, who worked with the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) as medical officer from September 1998 to February 2000. Hired on ad hoc basis, Kumar was given extension of services but was never inducted as a regular employee, despite repeated requests by him.

In her order, the judge came down heavily on the induction policy of companies. “Employers make ad-hoc appointments and resort to fictional breaks (gaps in job period) that subject the employees to arbitrary hire and fire policy and deprive them of the various benefits including financial, vacation and medical ones, which are available to government servants,” the court observed.

Referring to the Constitution, the ADJ said: “This pernicious system of appointment (ad hoc) is exploitative and violates Fundamental Rights of Articles 14 and 16 available to all citizens.” While Article 14 provides equality before law to every citizen, Article 16 ensures equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. “Equal pay for equal work is a constitutional mandate (vide Article 39) and ad hoc employees performing the same duties as regular employees cannot be denied equal financial benefits,” the court held.

Even though Kumar possessed an MBBS degree, a less qualified pharmacist was given a salary higher by Rs 3,000. In 2005, he filed a suit before a civil judge, who though declared that he was entitled to the salary differential between him and similarly placed employees, turned down his plea for recovery of the sum from the DJB. He moved an appeal before the district court, which observed the lower court had erred by not asking the DJB to pay him the amount.

“The appellant is entitled to the salary differential,” ADJ Lau said. Kumar has also been granted an interest of 6 per cent on the principal amount.