Supreme Court of India
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusBIHAR VETERINARY ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
- Citation
- 2008 INSC 238
- Decided
- 22 February 2008
- Disposal
- Case Allowed
- Bench
- A K MATHUR
Holding
Parity of pay with the Indian Veterinary Service cannot be granted and the Fitment Committee's recommendation of a Rs 6,500‑10,500 pay scale is valid, making judicial interference impermissible.
Summary
The Bihar Veterinary Association filed a writ petition seeking to have veterinarians employed in the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service placed on the same pay scale (Rs 8,000‑13,500) as the Indian Veterinary Service, arguing that the Fitment Committee had erred by recommending a lower scale of Rs 6,500‑10,500. The Patna High Court allowed the petition and directed the state to grant the higher scale. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that parity cannot be made between the state service and the central service because the state veterinarians are already placed on a scale comparable to the State Administrative Service and because pay‑scale fixation is a purely executive function. The Court emphasized that the Fitment Committee, after considering all relevant factors, validly recommended the lower scale and that courts should not interfere with such expert recommendations. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether veterinarians of the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service are entitled to parity of pay with the Indian Veterinary Service.
- Whether the courts can interfere with the recommendations of a Fitment Committee regarding pay‑scale fixation.
- Whether the grant of a pay scale is a judicially reviewable action or a purely executive function.
Subjects
pay parityfitment committeeservice lawexecutive functionjudicial reviewpay scale fixationstate servicecentral pay commission
Judgment
[2008) 3 S.C.R. 222
A STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.
v.
BIHAR VETERINARY ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.1507 of 2008)
FEBRUARY 22, 2008
B
[A.K. MATHUR AND ALTAMAS KABIR, JJ.]
Service Law:
Pay scale - Parity in - Determining factors - Claim of
C parity by Veterinarians employed in Bihar Animal Husbandry
Service with Indian Veterinary Service - Recommendations
of Fitment Committee challenged - Interference by High Court
with recommendations of Fitment Committee - Held: Not
warranted ·- Fitment Committee after taking into account
D conditions obtaining in Stc;ite of Bihar and duties discharged
by Veterinarians and other services vis-a-vis services in
Central Government worked out balance and recommended
the pay scc1le - Therefore, it was not proper to interfere with
the same - Picking up one class of service and granting highet
E pay scale ,3s available in Central Government is likely to
disturb the whole balance resulting in complex situation in the
State and may lead to ruination of finances of the State.
Administrative law:
F Judicial Review - Interference with recommendations of
Fitment Committee regarding the grant of pay scale - Scope
of - Held: Granting of pay scale is purely executi.ve action
and hence Courts not to interfere with same - Proper forum is
expert body - Service Law - Pay scale - Parity in.
G The respondent no.1 ls a registered association of
Veterinary l'.>octors employed in the service of Animal
Husbandry Department of the State of Bihar and '·
respondent Nos.2 to 9 are its members serving in different
capacities. Respondents filed a writ petition in High Court
H 222
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. v. BIHAR VETERINARY 223
( ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
on the ground that the Fitment Committee erroneously A
recommended the revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10,500/- .
for.the veterinarians serving in basic grade of Bihar Animal
Husbandry Service in place of Rs.8000-13,500/- as
recommended by the Fifth Central Pay Commission to the
Indian Veterinary service in basic gra.de and that the job B
of the Fitment Committee was only to recommend the pay
scale as was being given to the Central Government
Employees but instead of that the Fitment Committee
recommended a lower pay scale. Single Judge of High
Court allowed the writ petition and directed that the c
Veterinarians serving in the Bihar Animal Husbandry
Service be given the pay scale of Rs.8,000-13,500/- as was
granted to the members of the Indian Veterinary Service
on the basis of the parity of the pay scale admissible to
the employees of the Central Government.
D
Division Bench of High Court affirmed the same.
Hence the present appeal.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. A parity cannot be made between the E
members of the Indian Veterinary Service and the
members of the Bihar Animal 'Husbandry Service. The
members of this State Service have been allowed the pay
scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/-. These employees of the Bihar
Animal Husbandry Service are also at par with that of the F
State Administrative Service. Therefore, they cannot get
. the pay scale higher than the State service. Even then the
Fitment Committee has recommended the revised pay
scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- for the Administrative Services
of t'1e State of Bihar including these Veterinarians. The G
pay scales in the States are revised from time to time on
the recommendations of the Pay Commissions. A parity
~- 'f in a particular class of service depends on various factors.
·The Pay Commission has to consider the pay scales of
various services of the State and then to make a hierarchy
H
224 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 3 S.C.R.
' -
A of the pay scale in the State. It is not possible to have the
same pay scales as that of the employees of the Central
Government or even for that matter between two States.
The pay scales essentially depend upon the resources
of the Government. It is not always possible that the
B resources of the Central Government and the State
Government. are the same or even for that matter between
two States. Therefore, to decide and recommend pay '
scales the Fitment Committee has to take all factors into
consideration. It is true that it was mentioned in the report
c of the Fitment Committee that the Fitment Committee was
required to recommend without considering the economic
constraints of the State and the need for resources of the
development programmes and it was also canvassed that
the Fitment Committee does not have the constraint of
financial consequences but despite that the Committee
D
after elaborate discussion has recommended the pay ~.
scale of Rs.6,500-10,500 and the same pay scale has been
granted to the members of the respondent association.
It was pointed out that th~ post of Veterinary Officer is
equivalent to that of Medical Officers who are appointed
E after passing the M.B.B.S. degree and these Doctors
have been granted 25% of their basic pay as non-
practicing allowance. Taking into consideration all
these factors the Fitment Committee in its wisdom
has already recommended the pay scale to these
F employees as admissible to the Group 'B' Officers of • ~
the State of Bihar in the pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/-.
[Para 4] [229-A-G; 230-A, BJ
S C. Chandra & Ors. v State of Jharkhand & Ors. (2007)
8 SCC 279; State of Haryana v Tilak RaJ (2003) 6 SCC 123 -
G
relied on.
2. Granting of pay scale is a purely executive function
and hence the Court should not interfere with the same. ,,. .
Proper forum is an expert body and the expert body in
H the present case has recommended the pay scale of
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. v. BIHAR VETERINARY 225
ASSOCIATION AND ORS.
(
Rs.6,500-10,500/- after taking into consideration various A
factors. Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of the
High Court ought not to have interfered with that finding.
[Para 4] [230-D, E]
3. The Fitment Committee after taking into account
I the conditions obtaining in the State of Bihar and the
duties which are being discharged by the Veterinarians
B
~ and other services vis-a-vis the services in the Central
Government has worked out a balancing work and
recommended the pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- after
looking into various evidence which have been .produced c
before the Fitment Committee. Therefore, it was not proper
to have disturbed this finding nor was it correct on the
part of the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of
the High Court to have interfered with the same. If the
courts start disturbing the recommendations of the pay D
"''
scale in a particular class of service then it is likely to have
cascading effect on all related service wh.ich may result
i11to multifarious litigation. The Fitment Committee has
undertaken the exercise and recommended the wholesale
revision of the pay scale in the State of Bihar and if one E
class of service is to be picked up and granted higher
pay scale as is available in the Central Government then
the whole balance will be disturbed and other services
. are likely to be affected and it will result in complex
situation in the State and may lead to ruination of the F
finances of the State. Therefore, interference by the Single
~
Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High Court
with the recommendation of the Fitment Committee was
not warranted. [Para 4] [231-A, B, C, D, E]
G
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1507
of 2008 .
. 'r"
From the Judgment and final Order dated 30.11.2006 of
the High Court of Judicature at Patna in L. P.A. No. 886/2005.
H
226 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 3 S.C.R.
A Manish Kumar and Gopal Singh for the Appellants.
Raju Ramachandaran, Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,
Sudhanshu Saran and Tulika Mukherjee for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
B A.K. MATHUR, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated
30.11.2006 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.see of 2005
by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court whereby the
c learned Division Bench has affirmed the order passed by
lea~ned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge directed the
authorities to grant a pay scale of Rs.8000-13,500/- to the
Veterinary Doctors.
3. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this
D appeal are that the respondent No.1 is a registered association ..,
of Veterinary Doctors employed in the service of Animal
Husbandry Department of the State of Bihar and respondent
Nos.2 to 9 are the members of the aforesaid association serving
in different capacities in the Animal Husbandry Department of
E the State of Bihar. The respondents herein filed a writ petition in
the Patna High Court. The grievance raised in the petition was
that the Fitment Committee ignored the terms of reference as
contained in the Resolution of the State Government and
erroneously recommended the revised pay scale of Rs.6,500- .i..
F 10,500/- for the Veterinarians serving in the basic grade of the
Bihar Animal Husbandry Service in place of Rs.8,000-13,500/-
. Therefore, it was submitted that the resolution of the State
Government dated 8.2.1999 [Annexure-4 to the writ petition] to
the extent that the recommendation has been accepted should
G be quashed and it was further prayed that the State Government
be directed to grant the Veterinarians serving in the basic grade
of Bihar Animal Husbandry Service the revised scale of Rs.8000-
13,500/- and the scale of pay of Rs.10,000-15,200/-, Rs.12,0QO- ., ~
16,500/- to those serving in the Junior/$enior Selection Grade
H of the Basic entry grade. All these members of the Association
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. v. BIHAR VETERINARY 227
/ ASSOCIATION AND ORS. [A.K. MATHUR, J.]
are the Veterinarians duly selected by the Bihar Public Service . A
Commission and were appointed as Veterinary Officers to serve
the State of Bihar as Veterinary Physician/Surgeon to look after
the live-stock of the State. The pay scale of the employees of
the State of Bihar has been revised from time to time and the
t
t
last pay revision was effected in the year 1998. The State B
Government in consideration of the representations received
~1 from various employees' Union and Associations to grant their
members the Central pay scale and promotional benefits
available to the Central Government employees, agreed in
principle, to grant Its employees the Central pay scale along c
with promotional benefits which are available to the Central
Government employees and the State Government also
appbinted a Fitment/ Pay Revision Committee to achieve the
said purpose. That Committee recommended the Class I Central
Pay scale of Rs.2200-4000/- in the basic grade and Rs.3,000-
r- D
4,500/- and Rs.3,700-5,300/- in the Junior/ Senior Selection
Grade and Rs.4, 100-5,300/- in the suppertime selection grade.
Thereafter, the State of Bihar issued another resolution on
2.1.1998 and agreed in principle to allow the Central pay scale
along with Central service conditions to its employees and an
agreement to this effect was signed between the State E
Government and the Gazetted Officers Federation and State
Secretariat Employees' representatives and accordingly, a
.--'
Fitment Committee was constituted to make recommendations
for revision of the pay scale of the State Government employees
at par with the Central Government employees whose pay scales F
~
were revised on the basis of the recommendations of the Fifth
Central Pay Commission with effect from 1.1.1996. The Fitment
Committee considered the claim of the respondents and
recommended a pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- for the basic/
entry grade of the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service. This was G
not acceptable to the association and it was submitted that the
" r- .r,ecommendations of this Fitment Committee was contrary to
the pay scale recommended by the Fifth Central Pay
Commission which recommended grant of higher scale of pay
Qf Rs.8,500-13,500/-to the Veterinarians of the Indian Veterinary H
228 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 3 S.C.R.
\
A Service in the basic grade. Therefore, the Veterinarians serving
in the basic grade in the State of Bihar should also have been
fitted in the pay scale of Rs.8,000-13,500/-. Similarly, it was
claimed that the pay scales for other promotional posts should
be fitted on the basis of the recommendation of the Fifth Central
B Pay Commission. It was also pointed out that the Fitment
Committee in paragraph 2.2.6 of its report has noticed that the
recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission to grant
higher scale of Rs.2200-4,000/- to the entry grade of the U.T.
Civil/ Police Services has not been accepted by the Government
c of India. It wa$ also noted by the Fitment Committee in its report
that had that been allowed to the Union Territories Civil Services
then it would have been possible for the State to grant similar
pay scale to Bihar State Administrative/ Police Service in the
basic entry grade of the two services. The Fitment Committee
in paragraphs 2.2.10 and 2.8.1 of its report recommended the
0
lower scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- for the basic entry grade of
the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service as the said service on
comparison was found similar to the other State Services
notified in resolution of the State Government dated 28.2.1989.
In short, the submission of the respondent- association was that
E the members of the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service should be
granted the same pay scale as is admissible to Indian Veterinary
Service i.e. Rs.8,000-13,500/- as recommended by the Fifth
Central Pay Commission and granted to the members of the
Indian Veterinary Service. It was submitted that the job of the
F Fitment Committee was only to recommend the pay scale as
was being given to the Central Government Employees but
instead of that the Fitment Committee recommended a lower
pay scale. Learned Single Judge after hearing the parties
allowed the writ petition and directed that the Veterinarians
G serving in the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service should be given
the pay scale of Rs.8,000-13,500/- as is being granted to the
members of the Indian Venterinary Service on the basis of the ., ..
parity of the pay scale admissible to the employees of the Central
Government. Aggrieved against this order of learned Single
H Judge, Letters Patent Appeal No.886 of 2007 was preferred by
)
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. v. BIHAR VETERINARY 229
ASSOCIATION AND ORS. [A.K. MATHUR, J.]
the appellants before the Division Bench of the High Court but A
without any result. Hence the present appeal.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record. We fail to understand how can a parity be
made between the members of the Indian Veterinary Service
and the members of the Bihar Animal Husbandry Service. The B
members of this State Service have been allowed the pay scale
of Rs.6,500-10,500/-. These employees of the Bihar Animal
Husbandry Service are also at par with that of the State
Administrative Service. Therefore, they cannot get the pay scale
higher than the State service. Even then the Fitment Committee c
has recommended the revised pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/-
for the Administrative Services of the State of Bihar including
these Veterinarians. The pay scales in the States are revised
from time to time on the recommendations of the Pay
Commissions. A parity in a particular class of service depends D
r
on various factors. The Pay Commission has to consider the
pay scales of various services of the State and then to make a
hierarchy of the pay scale in the State. It is not possible to have
the same pay scales as that of the employees of the Central
Government or even for that matter between two States. The E
pay scales essentially depend upon the resources of the
Government. It is not always possible that the resources of the
Central Government and the State Government are the same
or even for that matter between two States. Therefore, to decide
.4
and recommend pay scales the Fitment Committee has to take F
all factor into consideration. It is true that it was mentioned in
the report of the Fitment Committee that the Fitment Committee
was required to recommend without considering the economic
constraints of the State and the need for resources of the
developmeht programmes and it was also canvassed that the
G
Fitment Committee does not have the constraint of financial
consequences but despite that the Committee after elaborate
discussion has recommended the pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500
' ~ and the same pay scale has been granted to the members of
the respondent association. It was pointed out that the post of
H
230 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 3 S.C.R.
\
A Veterinary Officer is equivalent to that of Medical Officers who
are appointed after passing the M.8.8.S. degree and these
Doctors have been granted 25% of their basic pay as non-
practising allowance. Taking into consideration all these factors
the Fitment Committee in its wisdom has already recommended
s the pay scah: to these employees as admissible to the Group
'B' Officers of the State of Bihar in the pay scale of Rs.6,500-
10,500/-. Recently in S. C. Chandra & Ors. V State of Jharkhand
& Ors [ (2007) 8 sec 279) this Court (to which one of us was a
party) examined the question of parity in pay scale and fixation
c of pay scales. Referring to an earlier decision of this Court in
State of Haryana v. Tilak Raj [(2003) 6 SCC 123), this Court
held that in order to get similar pay there should be complete
and wholesale identity between two groups. This Court after
examining all these cases on the subject has observed that
D granting of pay scale is a purely executive function and hence
the Court should not interfere with the same. Proper form is an
expert body and the expert body in the present case has
recommended the pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- after taking
into consideration various factors. Learned Single Judge as well
as the Division Bench of the High Court ought not to have
E interfered with that finding. In S.C.Chandra & Ors. (supra) this
Court observed as follows :
" For finding out whether there is complete and wholesale
identity, the proper forum is an expert body and not the
F writ court, as this requires extensive evidence. A
mechanical interpretation of the principle of equal pay for
equal work creates great practical difficulties. The courts
must realize that the job is both a difficult and time
consuming task which even experts having the assistance
of staff with requisite expertise have found it difficult to
G
undertake. Fixation of pay and determination of parity is
a complex matter which is for the executive to discharge.
Granting of pay parity by the court may result in a cascading
effect and reaction which can have adverse "1 '
consequences."
H
,,, STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. v. BIHAR VETERINARY 231
I
ASSOCIATION AND ORS. [A.K. MATHUR, J.]
Therefore, the Fitment Committee after taking into account A
the conditions obtaining in the State of Bihar and the duties which
are being discharges by the Veterinarians and other services
•' vis-a-vis the services in the Central Government has worked
out a balancing work and recommended the pay scale of
Rs.6,500-10,500/- after looking into various evidence which have B
been produced before the Fitment Committee. Therefore, it was
f not proper to have disturbed this finding nor was it correct on
the part of the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench
of the High Court to have interfered with the same. If the courts
start disturbing the recommendations of the pay scale in a c
particular class of service then it is likely to have cascading effect
on all related service which may result into multifarious litigation.
The Fitment Committee has undertaken the exercise and
recommended the wholesale revision of the pay scale in the
State of Bihar and if one class of service is to be picked up and
D
r granted higher pay scale as is available in the Central
Government then the whole balance will be disturbed and other
services are likely to be affected and it will result in complex
situation in the State and may lead to ruination of the finances
of the State. Therefore, interference by the learned Single Judge
as well-as the Division Bench of the High Court with the E
recommendation of the Fitment Committee was not warranted.
5. As a result of our above discussions, we allow this
~
appeal and set aside the order passed by the learned Single
Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High Court of Patna F
~
and dismiss the writ petition filed by the respondents. There
would be no order as to costs.
D.G. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "pay parity"Sign in to search