In Brief
The respondent, a registrar at a State University, sought pay parity with central university registrars after the Central Government revised pay scales in 2008. He had temporarily performed lecturer duties but was appointed as registrar under State rules with a different pay scale. The High Court ordered the State to extend the Central Government's pay scale to him. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that Central Government circulars are binding only on central universities, not state universities. Since registrars and lecturers have different qualifications and roles, the state's decision to revise lecturer pay scales without extending it to registrars was reasonable and did not violate equality. The Court emphasized that policy decisions deserve judicial deference unless arbitrary.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.