A Different Set of Employees Governed by a Different Set of Rules and Have Different Duties Cannot Claim Parity Merely Because They Obtain the Same Graduation: SC

While hearing the Indian Council of Agricultural Research through the Director General and Anr. vs. Rajinder Singh and Ors. case on August 22, 2024, the Supreme Court (SC) observed that a different set of employees governed by a different set of rules and have different duties are not entitled to benefits extended to another set of employees merely because they obtain the same graduation. The matter was heard by a two-judge bench constituting Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal. In this case, the pay scales of the employees of the Central Government were revised on the recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission. The appellant (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) issued a scheme vide letter to all field offices informing them about the revision of pay scales of the scientists working with the appellants. The communication provided for existing pay scales and the corresponding new pay scales for the Scientists, Scientists (senior scale), Scientists (selection grade/Senior Scientists), Principal Scientist, and other Senior Officers. Aggrieved against this order, the respondents filed OA before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the application filed by the respondents, extending them the benefit of the scheme in terms of which a scientist was eligible for two advance increments as and when he acquires a Ph.D. degree in his service career. 

Aggrieved against the same the appellants preferred Writ Petitions before the High Court, which were dismissed. The writ petition was dismissed by a cryptic order. The HC upheld the order of the Tribunal on the wrong premise by invoking Article 14, trying to equate the scientist and technical staff, merely because they are working with the appellants. The stand of the appellants is that the scientists belonging to the Agricultural Research Service are getting UGC pay scales. The benefit of two advance increments for acquiring a Ph.D. qualification was part of their pay package. Similar benefit was not extended to the technical personnel. For technical personnel, the appellants had adopted the revised scales as recommended by the Government of India for Central Government employees. The prayer in the present appeal is to set aside the order of the Tribunal as well as the High Court and rejection of the application filed by the respondents before the Tribunal. 

The SC bench observed, “Merely because different set of employees, who may be working in aid but governed by different set of rules and having different duties to discharge also obtain that qualification, will not entitle them to the benefits which were extended to different set of employees by the competent authority.” It held that the Tribunal and High Court have erred by equating technical personnel and scientists and granting respondents advance increments to which they are not entitled. Therefore, the SC said that the impugned orders passed by the High Court and the Tribunal are set aside and the Original Applications filed by the respondents before the Tribunal are dismissed.