Summary
The Court rejected daily-rated Board employees’ claim to higher scales under State resolutions of 1991 and 1992 which the autonomous Board had not adopted. Adoption of the parent 1988 resolution did not automatically incorporate those later changes. Mistaken grants by some zonal offices, subsequently withdrawn with recovery sought, could not create an Article 14 right to the same benefit. Pay decisions also required regard to the Board’s distinct finances and policy choices. The appeals were dismissed, while benefits under the adopted 1988 resolution were expressly continued.
Issues
- Whether adoption of the 1988 parent resolution automatically extended later State pay resolutions to Board employees.
- Whether mistaken grants to other employees established a right to parity.
Provisions considered
- Article 14, Constitution of IndiaEquality could not compel repetition of mistaken pay benefits to which the claimants had no independent entitlement. (¶ 15-16)
Held
- The Board had specifically adopted the 1988 resolution and granted its benefits. It had not adopted the 1991 and 1992 modifications and had issued contrary administrative instructions. Those later State resolutions did not automatically bind the autonomous statutory Board. (¶ 13-14)
- The Board’s employees could not demand the State Government scales as of right merely because the Board performed transferred public functions. Pay structures required a conscious decision taking account of its distinct financial capacity; courts should not lightly substitute their judgment on complex pay-equation questions. (¶¶ 13.3-13.7, 17)
- Article 14 protects positive equality and cannot perpetuate an illegal or mistaken benefit. Grants made inadvertently by some zonal offices, later withdrawn with recovery sought, did not establish the claimants’ independent entitlement under the unadopted resolutions. (¶ 15-16)
- The earlier decision involving different State Government departments did not establish parity between State employees and employees of this distinct Board. The claims under the later resolutions failed, but the benefits under the adopted 1988 resolution were to continue. (¶ 17-18)
Result
Both appeals dismissed; later-resolution pay benefits denied; benefits under the adopted 17 October 1988 resolution continued; no costs.