Holding

The merger of the Ganna Gram Sewak and Cane Supervisor posts is an executive act beyond the jurisdiction of the court, and the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering such merger.

Summary

Vyas Muni Mishra, a Ganna Gram Sewak, filed a writ petition under Art. 226 seeking the merger of the posts of Ganna Gram Sewak and Cane Supervisor into a single cadre, invoking the principle of equal pay for equal work under Art. 39(d). The Allahabad High Court ordered the merger, holding that the qualifications for both posts had become identical and that the duties were the same. The State of Uttar Pradesh and the Cane Supervisors appealed, arguing that the merger is an executive function and that the two posts have distinct qualifications and duties. The Supreme Court held that the merger or bifurcation of a cadre is a matter within the executive's jurisdiction and that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the merger. It further observed that Art. 39(d) is a non‑justiciable directive principle and that the duties and qualifications of the two categories are different, precluding the application of the equal‑pay principle to compel a merger. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order, dismissed the writ petition and allowed the appeals.

Issues considered

The court's jurisdiction to order merger of two service cadres under Art. 226.
Whether the principle of equal pay for equal work (Art. 39(d)) can be enforced to compel merger of posts.
Whether the qualifications and duties of Ganna Gram Sewaks and Cane Supervisors are identical.
Whether directive principles of the Constitution are enforceable in a court of law.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Art. 136, s. Art. 226, s. Art. 309, s. Art. 39(d)

Subjects

equal pay for equal workdirective principleservice cadre mergerjurisdictionadministrative lawconstitutional lawUttar Pradeshcane development departmentpromotionqualification

Judgment

INDER SINGH & ORS.
A
V.
VYAS MUNI MISHRA & ORS.

AUGUST 14, 1987

B [RANGANATH MISRA AND MURARI MORON DUTT, JJ.]

U.P. Cane Development (Fourth Class) Service Rules, 1972/U.P.
Ganna Paryavekshak (III) Service Rules, 1972: Ganna Gram Sewaks/
1
Cane Supervisors-Posts carrying different duties, basic educational
qualifications-Merger of-Whether permissible and legal.
c
Constitution of India, Arts. 226, 136, 39(d): Principle of equal
pay for equal work-Applicability of-Two different groups of persons
performing different duties-Prom'otional post having higher qualifica-
tions than the feeder post-Jurisdiction of the court to order merger-
Whether proper.
D
Service Law: Merger of two cadres into one or bifurcation of a
cadre-Within jurisdiction and authority of executive government-
Not of the court. '

E The U.P. Cane Development (Fourth Class) Service Rules, 1972
prescribe minimum qualification of High School Examination fol' the
post of Gaona Gram Sewak. The U.P. Gaona Paryavekshak (III)
Services Rules, 1972 lay down the basic qualification of Intermediate
(Agriculture) or equivalent or High School with two years' Diploma in
Agriculture for the post of Cane Supervisor, and provide for filling 50
F per cent of these posts by promotion from amongst permanent Gaona
Gram Sewaks. The Cane Commissioner by his letter dated March 10,
1975 recommended to the State Government that the minimum educa-
tional qualification for Gaona Gram Sewaks should be Intermediate. No
amendment, however, has been made to the said Rules.

G The duties that are to be performed by the Gaona Gram Sewaks ..,,.
are preparation of progress report, survey of cane areas, and develop-
ment programme. The Cane Supervisors are responsible for plant pro·
tection, inputs godown and nurseries in the areas of Gaona Gram
Sewaks.

H The respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the

972
INDER SINGH v. V.M. MISHRA 973
}.
Constitution praying for a writ of mandamus directing the State A
Government to merge the post of Gaona Gram Sewaks and the Cane
Supervisors into one cadre.

The High Court took the view that although the minimum educa-
tional qualifications required were High School for Gaona Gram
~ B
Sewaks and Intermediate in Agriculture for Cane Supervisors, since
1975 the minimum qualification became Intermediate in Agriculture
't for both Gaona Gram Sewaks and Cane Supervisors, that the nature of
duties peformed by the members of these two categories of posts was the
same, and relying upon the principle of equal pay for equal work, as
- contained in Art. 39(d) of the Constitution, allowed the writ petition
and directed the State Government to merge the said posts into one
c
1' cadre of Gaona Sahayak.

The State, and the Cane Supervisors preferred appeals to this
Court.

....... Allowing the appeals, D

HELD: 1.1 The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in direct-
ing the merger of the posts of Gaona Gram Sewaks and Cane
Supervisors. [977E]

... ,._ 1.2 The merger or bifurcation of a cadre is an executive act. It is
for the State to consider whether two groups of persons working under
two distinct posts perform the same kind of duties or not, and whether
E

in implementing the directive principle, as contained in Art. 39(d) of the
Constitution, it is necessary to merge the two posts into one cadre or
post. [980AB]
F
1.3 The principle of equal pay for equal work requires on the face
of it that the work to be performed by two groups of persons must be
equal. The Court may in such cases direct equal pay by way of remov-
ing unreasonable discrimination and treating the two groups, similarly
situated, equally. [977H; 980CD]
'i' G
In the instant case, the nature of the duties that are peformed by
the members of the two categories of posts are different. The Gaona
Gram Sewaks are responsible for preparation of progress report,
survey of the cane areas and development programme. On the other
hand Cane Supervisors are responsible for plant protection, inputs
godown and nurseries in the areas of Gaona Gram Sewaks. The H
974 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1987] 3 S.C.R.
-4:
A minimum qualification required for each post is also different. Both of
them function more or less independently. Furthermore, the post of
Cane Supervisor is a promotional post vis-a-vis the post of Ganna Gram
Sewak. It will, therefore, be beyond the jurisdiction of the court to
implement the principle of equal pay for equal work inasmuch as such
implementation will practically ,result in the amalgamation of the two
B posts. (978A, 979EF, 978B, 979G]
-4

2. Under the Rules the minimum qualification required for the 1
Ganna Gram Sewaks is High School or equivalent. So long as the Rules
are amended and the minimum qualification is not enhanced to Inter-

c
mediate in Agricnltnre, the Cane Development Department of the State
cannot prescribe or insist on a minimum qualification of Intermediate -
in Agriculture. The High Court, therefore, was not justified in relying y
upon the letter of the Cane Commissioner dated March 10, l'nS in
preference to the Roles framed under Article 309 of the Constitution for
taking the view that the minimum qualification for that post has been
Intermediate in Agriculture since 1975. [879CE, 978H]
D )--
3. Article 39(d) of the Constitution lays down the directive princi-
pie of equal pay for equal work for both men and women. The directive
principles contained in Part-IV or'the Constitution are not enforceable
in any court of law. It is a constitutional goal that has to be achieved at
the instance of the State. [979H-980A]
E -'(
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4115 .r
and 4116 of 1985.

From the Judgment and Order dated 12.4.1985 of the Allahabad
High Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 3441of1984.
F
J.P. Goyal, Rajesh for the Appellants in C.A. No. 4115 of 1985.

Anil Dev Singh, Mrs. S. Dikshit and Sudhir Kulshreshta for the
Appellants in C.A. No. 4116 of 1985.

G R. Ramachandran for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

DUTT, J.These two appeals by special leave, one preferred by
the State of U.P. and the other by the Cane Supervisors of the Cane
H Development Department, U.P., are directed against the judgment of
INDER SINGH v. V.M. MISHRA [DUTI, J.] 975

the Allahabad High Court directing the State Government to merge A
the posts of Ganna Gram Sewaks and Ganna Supervisors into the
cadre of Ganna Sahayak in the pay scale of Rs.400-615 with effect
from 1-7-1979.

,I-: In the hierarchy of field officers in the Cane Development
Department, U.P., the post of Ganna Gram Sewak is at the bottom. B
t The next higher post is the post of Cane Supervisor. Under the Cane
Development (Fourth Class) Service Rules, 1972 framed under Article
309 of the Constitution of India, the posts of Ganna Gram Sewaks are
filled by direct recruitment and the minimum qualification prescribed
- therefor by Rule 9(3) of the said Rules is that a candidate for recruit-
ment in the post of Ganna Gram Sewak must have passed the High
c
'( School Examination from the Board of High Schools and Intermediate
Education, U.P., or an equivalent examination and he must know
Hindi in Devnagri script. Under the Uttar Pradesh Ganna Paryave-
kshak (III) Service Rules, 1978, also framed under Article 309 of the
Constitution of India, 50 per cent of the posts of Cane Supervisors are
·-.i to be filled by direct recruitment and the remaining 50 per cent by D
promotion on the basis of seniority from amongst permanent Ganna
Gram Sewaks of the concerned region. The basic qualification for the
post of Cane Supervisor is Intermediate (Agriculture) or equivalent or
High School with two years' Diploma in Agriculture. The duties that
11re to be performed by the Ganna Gram Sewaks are preparation of
)l._ progress report, survey of the cane areas and development program- E
. mes. The Cane Supervisors are responsible for plant protection, inputs
godown and nurseries in the areas of Ganna Gram Sewaks.

f The State of U .P. appointed a Second Pay Commission in the
year 1979. The Ganna Gram Sewaks submitted a representation to the
Commission demanding that since their qualifications were similar to F
those of Cane Supervisors and they performed the same kind of duties,
they should get the same pay scale as that of the Cane Supe1visors. It
appears that on the suggestion of the Pay Commission, the State
Government appointed a Task Force Committee. The Task Force
YCommittee in its report recommended the merger of the posts of
Ganna Gram Sewaks and Cane Supervisors into one group to be G
designated as Ganna Sahayaks and allotted an equal field of opera-
tion. It was observed that the merger being effected would satisfy the
demand of the Ganna Gram Sewaks for the equalisation of their pay
scale with that of the Cane Supervisors. The said recommendation was
made by the Task Force Committee on the ground that there was no
special difference between these two categories of posts in regard to H

•
976 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1987] 3 S.C.R. .....

A the duties performed by the members of each category. The Second
Pay Commission, however, did not accept the recommendation made
by the Task Force Committee for the merger of these two categories of
posts jnto one category, namely, Ganna Sahayak. After taking into
consideration the minimum academic qualification and the nature of
duties for each category, the 'Second Pay Commission, inter alia,-i_
B recommended the revision of the pay scales as follows:-

CANE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

S. No. Name of Post
Existing
Pay Scale
Proposed
-
c y
46. Cane Supervisor/ 230-385 400-615
Seed Asstt. Ordinary Ordinary
Grade Grade

D 250-425 5 10-675
(Selection After
Grade) After IO years
of service
Selection Grade
( 15% Selecticn
E Grade on the ....
)IF
post of
Supervisor)

47. Ganna Gram Sewak 185-265 325-495
Ordinary Ordinary
F Grade Grade

200-320 400-540
Selection After 15 years
Grade of service
Selection Grade
G on 15% posts.

The recommendation of the Second Pay Commission was con-
sidered by the Review Committee and, thereafter, by the Cabinet
Sub-Committee. There is a dispute between the parties as to whethe1
the Cabinet Sub-Committee had accepted the recommendation made
H by the Task Force Committee. Be that as it may, the State Govern-

•
INDER SINGH v. V.M. MISHRA [DUTI, J.] 977

ment accepted the recommendations of the Second Pay Commission A
only with a slight modification that instead of a pay scale of Rs.325-495
for Ganna Gram Sewaks, it would be Rs.330-495.

One of the Ganna Gram Sewaks, Shri Vyas Muni Mishra, the
respondent No. I, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High
Court praying for a writ of mandamus directing the State Government B
to merge the posts of Ganna Gram Sewaks and Cane Supervisors into
' one cadre of 'Ganna Sahayak'. The High Court took the view that
although the minimum educational qualifications required were High
School for Ganna Gram Sewaks and Intermediate in Agriculture for
IZane Supervisors, since 1975 the minimum qualification for both
Ganna Gram Sewaks and Cane Supervisors became Intermediate in C
(
Agriculture. Further, the High Court was of the view that the nature of
duties performed by the members of these two categories of J?OSts was
the same. Accordingly, relying upon the principle of equal pay for
equal work, as contained in Article 39(d) of the Constitution, the High
Court allowed the writ petition and directed the State Government to
merge the posts of Ganna Gram Sewak and that of Cane Supervisor D
into one post as Ganna Sahayak in the pay scale of Rs.400-615 with
effect from July l, 1979. The State of U.P. and the Cane Supervisors
being aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court have preferred the
above appeals.

At the outset it may be said that the High Court exceeded its E
jurisdiction in directing the merger of the two posts. It may be that the
Task Force Committee and the Review Committee had recommended
for the merger, but it was for the State Government to consider
r whether such merger should be made or not. The State Government
after consideration of the relevant reports and recommendations
accepted the recommendation of the Second Pay Commission only F
with regard to the revision of the pay scale of the Ganna Gram Sewaks
with the slight modification by an increase of Rs. 5 at the initial stage
of the recommended pay scale. The question whether two posts should
be merged into one or not is absolutely within the jurisdiction and,
authority of the Executive Government. However much the High
Court was influenced by the principle of equal pay for equal work for G
both men and women as contained in Article 39(d) of the Constitution,
the High Court was not justified in exceeding its jurisdiction for giving
effect to· the said doctrine.

The principle of equal pay for equal work requires on the face of
it that the work to be peformed by two groups of persons must be H
978 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987) 3 S.C.R.

equal. It has been already noticed that the duties that had to be
A
performed by the Ganna Gram Sewaks are preparation of progress
report, survey of the cane areas and development programmes. On the
other hand, the Cane Supervisors are responsible for plant protection,
inputs godown and nurseries in the areas of Ganna Gram Sewaks.
Thus the nature of duties 1hat are performed by the members of these
B two categories of posts· is different. It has been observed by the Second
Pay Commission that the Department has so fixed the duties of the two
functionaries that both of them now function more or less indepen-
dently. The High Court did no.t discuss in detail as to whether the
Ganna Gram Sewaks and the Cane Supervisors perform the same
duties. The High Court has only referred to an observation in tht
report of the Task Force Committee thatthere were not much differ-
c ences in the duties performed by these two categories of officers. As
has been stated already, the Second Pay Commission did not acc,ept
the recommendation of the Task Force Committee for the merger of
the two posts into one. It is true that the Cane Supervisors are not
doing any supervision of the work of the Ganna Gram Sewaks, but in
D view of the nature of duties performed by both, as mentioned above, it
is difficult to hold that both perform the same kind of duties. We have
also looked into the reports of the Task Force Committee and the
Review Committee. In our opinion, these two Committees have not
properly dealt with the nature of duties performed by the Ganna Gram
Sewaks and Cane Supervisors, although both these Committees have
E recommended the merger of the two posts. As soon as, therefore, it is
held that the two groups of persons do not perform the same kind of
duties, the question of equal pay for equal work does not arise.

In directing merger of the two posts, the High Court has greatly
relied upon the fact that although the minimum educational qualifica-
F tion for Ganna Gram Sewaks was High School, since 1975 the
minimum educational qualification for the Ganna Gram Sewaks has
been Intermediate in Agriculture. In other words, according to the
High Court the minimum educational qualification required for both
·these posts is Intermediate in Agriculture. We have already referred to
the Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution under which
G the minimum qualification for the posts of Ganna Gram Sewaks has
been prescribed as High School or equivalent examination and for the
Cane Supervisors as Intermediate (Agriculture) or equivalent or High
School with two years' Diploma in Agriculture. The minimum qualifi-
cations, as prescribed, have not yet been changed by the amendment
of the said Rules. In entertaining the view that the minimum qualifica-
H tion for the Ganna Gram Sewaks has been since 1975 Intermediate in
INDER SINGH v. V.M. MISHRA [DUIT, J.] 979

Agriculture, the High Court has placed reliance upon a letter dated
A
March 10. 1975 addressed by the Cane Commissioner, U.P., to the
Deputy Secretary, Cane Development Department, Government of
U .P. In that letter, it was recommended that the minimum educational
qualification for the Ganna Gram Sewaks should be Intermediate in
).- accordance with tire proposal of the Gaona Gram Sewaks' Union,
U.P. It was, accordingly, requested by the Cane Commissioner in the B
\_ said letter that the Government might consider the minimum qualifica-
f tion as recommended. It is the case of the State of U.P. that the said
letter was issued in connection with 600 new posts of Ganna Gram
Sewaks to be created under non-statutory bodies, namely. Sakkar

- {
Nidhi and Gaona Board. It is contended that these 600 posts have
nothing to do with the posts of Gaona Gram Sewaks under the Cane
Development Department of the State of U.P. In our opinion, the c
High Court should not have placed any reliance upon any such recom-
mendation made by the Cane Commissioner, when, under the Rules
framed under Article 309 of the Constitution, the minimum qualifica-
tion required for the Ganna Gram Sewaks is High School or equiva-
'1 lent. So long as the Rules are amended and the minimum qualification D
is not enhanced to Intermediate in Agriculture, the Cane Develop-
ment Department of the Government cannot prescribe or insist on a
minimum qualification of Intermediate in Agriculiure. The Second
Pay Commission could not also equate the posts of Ganna Gram
Sewaks with that of Cane Supervisors on the ground that the minimum
,.__ qualification for the two posts are different. The High Court was, E
therefore, not justified in relying upon the said letter of the Cane
Commissioner in preference to the Rules framed under Article 309 of

r the Constitution. In our view, therefore, not only the nature of duties
attached to each post is different, but also the minimum qualification
required for each post is also different.
F
As stated earlier, the posts of Gaona Gram Sewaks are filled by
direct recruitment. So far as the posts of Cane Supervisors are con-
cerned, 50 per cent of the same are filled by promotion from the posts
of Gaona Gram Sewaks and the remaining 50 per cent are filled by
direct recruitment. Thus, the post of Cane Supervisor is a promotional
')' post vis-a-vis the post of Gaona Gram Sewak. In our view where, as in G
the instant case, of the two posts, one being the promotional post and
the other being the feeder post, it will be beyond the jurisdiction of the
Court to implement the principle of equal pay for equal work
inasmuch as such implementation will practically result in the amalg-
mation of the two posts leading to great administrative difficulties.
Article 39( d) of the Constitution Jays down the Directive Principle of H
980 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987) 3 S.C.R.

A equal pay for equal work for both men and women. The directive
principles contained in Part-IV of the Constitution are not enforceable
in any court of law. It is a constitutional goal that has to be achieved at
the instance of the State. Merger or bifurcation of a cadre is an execu-
tive act and normally the Court does not deal with it. It is for the State
B
to consider whether two groups of persons working under two distinct -1
posts perform the same kind of duties or not and whether in imple-
menting the directive principle, as contained in Article 39(d) of the · -.J
Constitution, it is necessary to merge these two posts into one cadre or
post. If the State Government is of the view that it is necessary that
there should be a merger of the two posts into one post, the State
Government has to take steps in that regard by framing proper rules
C with regard to seniority, promotions, etc. But, when two groups of
persons are in the same or similar posts performing same kind of work, ).-
-
either in the same or in the different Government departments, the
Court may in suitable cases direct equal pay by way of removing
unreasonable discrimination and treating the two groups, similarly
D situated, equally. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, we
are of the view that the High Court was not justified in directing a ~
merger of the two posts, namely, the posts of Ganna Gram Sewaks and
Cane Supervisors.

For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned judgment of the High
Court is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed. Both these appeals
E are allowed. There is, however, no order as to costs.

This judgment, however, will not prevent the State of U.P. from
considering the merger of these two posts and the consequent equali-
sation of pay. 'i
F P.S.S, Appeals allowed.