ABHINAV SONI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions which arise for decision in this writ petition are:--

(2.) At the outset, it may be stated that the petitioners are being paid the minimum of the pay scale, which is being paid to the regularly appointed Veterinary Officer, which is now termed as pay band plus grade pay. This is the practice being followed virtually in all the departments of the State of Himachal Pradesh. The grievance of the petitioners is that whereas the regularly appointed Veterinary Officers are granted 25% non-practicing allowance and such allowance is also being paid to the Medical Officers appointed on contract basis whether in general category or dental category, only the Veterinary Officers appointed on contract basis are being denied this allowance. They on the basis of doctrine of equal pay for equal work claim that the allowances which are payable, especially non-practicing allowance, which is being paid to other similarly situated doctors, whether veterinary or otherwise, should also be granted to them.

(3.) The case of the respondent-State is that the petitioners are contract employees. They had entered into an agreement and are bound by the terms of the contract. Further according to the State the petitioners cannot be transferred and have the advantage of being posted at one station. It is further contended that since the petitioners are ad hoc employees and have not undergone the regular and more stringent process of recruitment, they cannot claim parity in pay scales. It is lastly contended that the duties of the contract employees are qualitatively and quantitatively different from the doctors who deal with human beings and also the veterinary doctors who are appointed on regular basis.