### Reinstated Temporary Employees Entitled to Minimum of Regular Pay Scale but Not Full Backwages Without Evidence of Non-Gainful Employment

The 64 Respondents were engaged by the Petitioner-University on various temporary posts (Peons, Clerks, Scientific Assistants, etc.) for varying periods, some exceeding 14 years.

On 30 June 2017, the University issued a circular discontinuing their services.

The Respondents filed a complaint under the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971, alleging unfair labour practices under Items 5, 6, and 9 of Schedule IV, seeking permanency and equal pay.

The Industrial Court, via judgment dated 28 November 2023, declared an unfair labour practice under Item 6, directed reinstatement, and ordered payment of wages in the "lowest grade" from the date of initial joining.

The University challenged this order via the present Writ Petition.

1. Whether the Industrial Court had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint regarding termination given the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act.

2. Whether the discontinuation of services constituted a "termination" in violation of Sections 25F and 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

3. Whether the Respondents were entitled to "equal pay" at the lowest grade from their initial dates of joining.

4. Whether the relief of backwages was sustainable in the absence of pleadings or evidence regarding the lack of gainful employment.

The Court applied Item 6, Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 regarding the use of temporary workers to deny permanent status.

It relied on *State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh*, establishing that temporary employees are entitled to the minimum of the pay scale (entry-level pay plus DA) of the regular post held, but not increments.

Regarding limitation on arrears, it followed *Union of India v. Tarsem Singh* and *M.R. Gupta v. Union of India*, holding that while a wrong may be "recurring," recovery of money/arrears is restricted by the statutory limitation period (90 days under the MRTU & PULP Act).

On backwages, it applied *Management of Regional Chief Engineer v. Their Workmen*, clarifying that *Deepali Gundu Survase* does not grant an automatic right to 100% backwages.

The Court upheld the Industrial Court's jurisdiction, noting that the discontinuation occurred during the pendency of a permanency claim.

It found the "termination" illegal because the University failed to prove the appointments were strictly for fixed tenures or that a seniority list was followed per Section 25G of the ID Act, especially since 925 other temporary workers remained employed.

However, the Court found the Industrial Court’s direction to pay the "lowest grade" (Peon's salary) to all professionals (like Scientific Assistants) illogical and contrary to the prayer for "equal pay for equal work".

Furthermore, the Industrial Court erred by granting arrears from the date of initial joining (some as far back as 2003), violating the 90-day limitation period for filing complaints.

Finally, since the Respondents failed to plead or lead evidence on the lack of gainful employment, a grant of 100% backwages was deemed an excessive financial burden on the University.

Reinstatement is upheld but the claim for permanency remains rejected as it was not granted by the lower court.

Arrears of "equal pay" are restricted to the 90-day period prior to the filing of the complaint.

"Equal pay" is defined as the entry-level pay in the relevant pay scale plus DA, not the "lowest grade" in the University.

Backwages from the date of termination (5 July 2017) to the date of the Industrial Court's judgment (28 November 2023) are reduced to 50% due to lack of evidence on gainful employment.

Full wages (entry-level pay + DA) are payable from 29 November 2023 until actual reinstatement.