In Brief
Conductors and drivers engaged under statutory rules by Haryana Roadways were initially paid as daily-wagers or contract labourers before being placed on regular pay scales. The High Court held that paying different wages for identical work violated the constitutional principle of equal pay for equal work, and declared the rules unconstitutional. The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision on merits but modified the arrears award, holding that arrears should be paid only from the date of the High Court judgment (1 April 2013), not from the date of initial appointment, following established precedent on limiting arrears liability in cases where legal rights were previously uncertain.", <parameter name="cited_cases">[{"raw_citation": "State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148", "case_name": "State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh", "cited_year": "2017", "paragraph": "7", "treatment": "relied", "treatment_by": "this_court"}, {"raw_citation": "(2006) 4 SCC 1", "case_name": "State of Karnataka v. Umadevi", "cited_year": "2006", "paragraph": "10", "treatment": "followed", "treatment_by": "this_court", "treatment_quote": "We are satisfied, that in terms of the above judgment, arrears should have been held, to be payable to the respondents, only with effect from the date when the impugned judgment was rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court, i.e., with effect from 1.4.2013. We are indeed bound to follow the aforesaid declared position, by the Constitution Bench of this Court."}]
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.