Equal pay for equal work
The Constitution of India 1949: Art.39 (d) says the state has to ensure that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women.
Equal pay for equal work is a fundamental right?
Though the principle is not expressly declared by the Constitution to be a fundamental right yet it may be concluded by construing Arts. 14 and 16 in the light of Art.39(d).
Service Law – the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ would be applicable to all the concerned temporary employees, so as to vest in them the right to claim wages, at par with the minimum of the pay-scale of regularly engaged Government employees, holding the same post. State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh [Supreme Court of India, 26-10-2016].
Equal pay for equal work constitutional right, SC reiterates
NEW DELHI, Oct 27, 2016, DHNS

The Supreme Court said any
employer paying less wages to temporary staff was indulging in an “act
of exploitative enslavement”.
It has already been held that ‘equal pay for equal work’ is a constitutional principle, said the apex court.
The
court also decried any move to make differential treatment with
temporary employees at times described as daily-wage employees, ad hoc
appointees, employees appointed on casual basis, contractual employees
and the like.
“It is fallacious to determine artificial
parameters to deny fruits of labour. An employee engaged for the same
work, cannot be paid less than another, who performs the same duties and
responsibilities. Certainly not, in a welfare
The court said any one, compelled to work at a lesser wage, does not do so voluntarily as he has to provide food and shelter to his family “at the cost of his self respect and dignity, self worth, and his integrity.”
“Any
act, of paying less wages, as compared to others similarly situate,
constitutes an act of exploitative enslavement, emerging out of a
domineering position. Undoubtedly, the action is oppressive, suppressive
and coercive, as it compels involuntary subjugation,” the bench said.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
Writ Petition (PIL) No. 115 of 2018
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
Writ Petition (PIL) No. 115 of 2018
August 30, 2018.
In the matter of Prevention of Recurrent Strikes
Organized by various Government/Non Government
Unions/Organizations .........Suo Motto PIL
Organized by various Government/Non Government
Unions/Organizations .........Suo Motto PIL
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
And Another .......Respondents
And Another .......Respondents
Taking a tough stance against indiscriminate strikes in the state, the Uttarakhand High Court has directed the state to prohibit such strikes in certain departments like that of education, public health, transport service, public works department, irrigation and revenue. The court also directed the state to consider invoking the ‘No Work No Pay’ principle in the larger public interest.
The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Manoj Tiwari passed several such directions in a suo motu PIL heard by the court after taking cognizance of a letter highlighting the tendency of employees of the state to resort to strikes without any genuine cause.
The court also noted that it is the duty of the state government to listen to genuine grievances of the employees from time to time.
Finally, the court directed the state government to prohibit strikes in certain essential services under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Essential Services Maintenance Act and it to withdraw recognition of service association in case employees resort to illegal strikes.
The state has also been directed to set up Grievance Redressal Committee within eight weeks in order to address genuine grievances of employees.