21 May 2024 Employee Related >> Corporate Law  

Teaching Assistants (TAs) at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Sarang (IGIT) have won a legal battle for equal pay with their counterparts at the University College of Engineering (UCE), Burla. The Orissa High Court recently ruled in favor of the TAs, granting them parity in pay scales with UCE Junior Instructors.

The case centered on the principle of "equal pay for equal work." The TAs argued that their qualifications, job responsibilities, and even pay scales were identical to those of UCE Junior Instructors. In 1981, the state government had issued an order granting UCE Junior Instructors a promotional scale of pay after five years of service, irrespective of available positions. The TAs sought the same benefit for themselves.

The state and IGIT contested the claim. The state argued that the UCE order was a one-time measure specific to that institution. IGIT further contended that the TAs had already received promotions or financial upgradations, making the claim irrelevant. Additionally, IGIT argued that its previous recommendation for the TAs did not create a legal obligation and did not prevent them from contesting the claim in court.

The High Court, however, found merit in the TAs' arguments. The Court emphasized the identical nature of work and qualifications between the two groups. It also rejected the state's claim that the UCE order was a one-time measure, citing the order's wording and reasoning. The Court also pointed out IGIT's contradictory stance, highlighting their previous recommendation for the TAs.

As a result of the Court's judgment, the TAs will be entitled to the Senior Teaching Assistant pay scale, retroactive to their fifth year as TAs. This benefit applies until their promotion or receipt of financial upgradations like Time Bound Advancement Scale (TBAS), Assured Career Progression (ACP), or Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP). The state and IGIT authorities are required to comply with the Court's order within four months.

This case reinforces the legal principle of equal pay for equal work, ensuring fairness for employees performing similar roles with the same qualifications. It also highlights the importance of consistency from government institutions in their recommendations and actions.