Vigilance Bureau Staff Entitled To Equal Pay As Other Police Units From 2015: Patna High Court Upholds Retrospective Additional Salary
The Patna High Court has confirmed that Vigilance Bureau staff are entitled to retrospective parity in additional salary benefits, bringing them in line with other Bihar Police units.The matter was decided by the bench of ACJ Sudhir Singh and Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma.The case stemmed from a Single Judge decision holding that the policy dated 30.06.2017—granting one month's additional...
The Patna High Court has confirmed that Vigilance Bureau staff are entitled to retrospective parity in additional salary benefits, bringing them in line with other Bihar Police units.
The matter was decided by the bench of ACJ Sudhir Singh and Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma.
The case stemmed from a Single Judge decision holding that the policy dated 30.06.2017—granting one month's additional salary to Vigilance Bureau personnel—must be applied retrospectively from 27.08.2015, when similar benefits were extended to other police units.
The omission of the Vigilance Department in the 2015 resolution was treated as a technical error, and the present appeal was filed against that finding.
In this matter, the High Court relied on Supreme Court judgments, including State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Jagjit Singh and Ors., (2017) 1 SCC 148, and Randhir Singh v. Union of India. In these cases, the Court held that “merely the fact that the employees concerned were engaged in different departments of the Government was not by itself sufficient to justify different pay scales. It was acknowledged, that though persons holding the same rank/designation in different departments of the Government may be discharging different duties. Yet it was held, that if their powers, duties and responsibilities were identical, there was no justification for extending different scales of pay to them, merely because they were engaged in different departments. Accordingly it was declared, that where all relevant considerations were the same, persons holding identical posts ought not to be treated differently in the matter of pay.”
The High Court, therefore, reiterated the principle of “equal pay for equal work,” as recognised in State of U.P. v. J.P. Chaurasia and the Grih Kalyan Kendra Workers' Union case.
It held that Vigilance Bureau personnel are entitled to one month's additional salary for 2015–16 and 2016–17, since they deserve the same treatment as other police units from 27.08.2015.
Case title: The State of Bihar and Ors v. Satya Narayan Ram and Ors
Case No.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1773 of 2021
Counsel for the Appellants: Mr. P.K. Shahi, Advocate General; Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8; Mr. Anil Kumar, AC to SC-8; Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC-8 Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. Prakritita Sharma, Advocate; Mr. Amarjeet, Advocate