Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Randhir Singh v. Union of India, (1982) 1 SCC 618
Bench: A.N. Sen, Baharul Islam and O. Chinnappa Reddy, JJ.
Writ Petition No. 4676 of 1978
Case Referred: Binoy Kumar Mukerjee vs. Union of India MANU/DE/0267/1972; Kishori Mohanlal Bakshi vs. Union of India (UOI) MANU/SC/0389/1961
Ratio Decidendi:
"Equal pay for equal work' is not a mere demagogic slogan. It is a constitutional goal capable of attainment through constitutional remedies by the enforcement of constitutional rights.”
FACTS OF THE CASE
The petition in this case Randhir Singh was unemployed driver constantly in the Delhi police force that comes under the Delhi administration. As an ex-serviceman he had served as a gunner (driver) in the artillery corpse of the Indian Army. When he was discharged from the army his job application was forwarded by directorate general of Ministry of Defence to the Delhi armed police. He underwent a test and submitted a verified Civil Heavy Transport Driving Licence which made him an enlisted driver in the Delhi Police Force and got assigned the designation of constable as per the department's structure.
Despite being recruited as a driver which held specialised duties placed in a lower pay scale of ₹210–270 for non-matriculate Driver-Constables and ₹225–308 for matriculates. When Singh compared themselves to the drivers that performed similar duties in other government departments, the latter received significant higher pay. For example:
- Railway Protection Force: ₹260–400
- Non-Secretariat Offices: ₹260-350
- Secretariat Offices: ₹260-390
- Language Commission: ₹260–300
- Fire Brigade and Light House Department: ₹330–480
Singh, along with drivers in the department who were facing same low pays, in similar positions, submitted their grievances to the authorities claiming that the Third Pay Commission is not properly assessing and considering their roles.
The petitioner’s argument revolved around the fact that authorities have failed to acknowledge the distinct nature of their responsibility that arises in driving with armed police forces that includes operating heavy vehicles, working long and irregular hours, and being exposed to sensitive security risks. Even after fulfilling the same responsibilities and functions as other drivers that fall under Delhi Administration and Central Government, Driver-Constables like Singh were deprived of equivalent compensation and were excluded from such pay scale.
When the petitioner did not see any acknowledgment for the concerns, he filed a petition under article 32 of Indian Constitution and seek the direction for this pay parity. He was represented by Advocate M.S. Ganesh, while the respondents were represented by Advocates N.C. Talukdar, R.N. Poddar, and A. Subhashini.
ISSUES RAISED
Whether the petitioner, a Driver-Constable in the Delhi Police Force, is entitled to the same pay scale as drivers employed in other departments of the Government of India, despite being designated as a constable?
.jpeg)
 and Ors.){kind=link}