The Division Bench of Jharkhand High dismissed the appeal of Additional District Programme Officers who filed an application against the discrimination in the increment as compared to other employees and observed that the employer shall be the right person to explain the conditions of employment and unless it is demonstrated before the Court by producing an indisputable document the stand taken by the employer shall be accepted by the Court.
Brief Facts:
The petitioners, appointed to the post of Additional District Programme Officer, filed the interlocutory application against the decision of the State Coordination Committee to provide a 6% increment to the contractual employees.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the appellants discriminated against the contractual employees as compared to other employees by granting them a 6% increment as compared to the 25% increment to other employees. The counsel further referred to the state taken by the Jharkhand Education Project Council which stated that the emolument fixed for Additional District Programme Officers was inclusive of a 19% hike.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that the advertisement for the post of Additional District Programme Officer used the term consolidated which makes it clear that the monthly emolument paid to the Additional District Programme Officers included other service-linked benefits as admissible to them. It was further stated that the consolidated monthly emolument paid to the officers included the 19% increment.
The court further observed that the employer shall be the right person to explain the conditions of employment and unless it is demonstrated before the Court by producing an indisputable document the stand taken by the employer shall be accepted by the Court and it is the employer and not the court which decides the condition of the service of the employees.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal as it found no reason to interfere in the matter.
Case Title: Ashish Kumar and ors. vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandrashekhar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra
Case No.: LPA No. 565 of 2019
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Rahul Kumar and Ms. Apoorva Singh
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Krishna Murari, Mr. L.G.R.N Shahdeo and Mr. Raj Vardhan
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
