http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: NATIONAL POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: CORPORATE EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATION OF NTPC (CEAN)NEW DELHI AND

DATE OF JUDGMENT13/03/1992

BENCH: PATNAIK, R.C. (J) BENCH: PATNAIK, R.C. (J) VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J)

CITATION:  1992 AIR 1425            1992 SCR  (2) 234  1992 SCC  Supl.  (2) 283 JT 1992 (2)   344  1992 SCALE  (1)670

ACT:      Constitution of India , 1950 : Article 226.      Formation  of National Power Transmission  Corporation- Transfer  of assets and employees of National Thermal  Power Corporation  and  other  generating   organisations-Petition challenging  transfer-Claim of equal pay for equal  work  by employees recruited from National Thermal Power Corporation- Direction by High Court at interlocutory stage,‘if employees recruited  from other Corporations receive higher  emolument then   employees  recruited  from  National  Thermal   power Corporation   should  be  treated  on  par’-Direction   held unjustified.

HEADNOTE:      The National Power Transmission Corporation (NPTC)  was incorporated  on  23rd October, 1989. Governments  of  India issued   instructions  regarding  transfer  of  assets   and employees from other generating organisations to NPTC.  The National  Thermal  Power Corporation (NTPC)  also  issued  a circular in conformity with the Government’s instructions. The  respondent-association  filed a writ  petition  in  the Delhi  High  Court,  challenging the  instructions  and  the circular.  Based on the under taking given by  the  Attorney General  the  Division  Bench f the  High  Court  passed  an interim  order  directing that the NPTC should  not  recruit persons  from any source other than NTPC and if it  recruits employees  from other Corporation, it should pay  equal  pay for  equal  work i.e. in case the employees  recruited  from other  Corporation  get  higher emoluments  doing  the  same nature of work then the employees recruited from NTPC should also  be  paid  the same higher emoluments.  NPTC  filed  an appeal  in this court challenging the interim order  on  the ground that having regard to the scope of the writ  petition and  the relief sought, the High Court erred in passing  the interim order.      Allowing the appeal, this court,                                                  235 HELD  : The terms and conditions of service of employees  of National  Thermal  Power Corporation were protected  in  the instructions  issued  by  the Government of  India  and  the circular issued by the National Thermal Power Corporation as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

also  in  the  undertaking given  by  the  learned  Attorney General.   The   employees   of   National   Thermal   Power Corporation  on transfer-absorption were not to  suffer  any detriment  as  regards the terms and conditions  of  service enjoyed   by  them  before  their  transfer-absorption.   No irreparable  injury was going to be caused to the  employees of  National  Thermal  Power  Corporation  if  the  impugned direction  was  not  given.   In  fact  the  said  direction militated against the observation made by Division Bench of the  High Court.  The High Court at the interlocutory  stage should not have given the direction that if the employees of other   Corporations  other  than  National  Thermal   Power Corporation  receive  higher emoluments,  the  employees  of National  Thermal Power Corporation should also be  entitled to  the same.  Accordingly, the direction given by the  high court is set aside. [241G-H, 242A-C]      State  of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. v. G. Sreenivasa Rao  & Ors., [1989] 2 SCC 290, referred to.

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2257 of 1992.      From the Judgment and Order dated 21.10.91 of the Delhi High  Court  in C.M. No. 4875 of 1991 in C.W.  No.  2377  of 1991.      G   Ramaswamy,  Attorney  General,  P.   P.   Malhotra, S.K.Dhingra, J.C. Seth and Gurnam singh for the Appellants.      G.  B. Pai, Janarangana Das, Amarendra Bal,  Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, G.V. Rao and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal for the Respondents.      The following Judgment of the Court was delivered by      PATNAIK, J. Special leave granted.      On  23rd October, 1989 was incorporated National  Power Transmission   Corporation   (NPTC)  with  the   object   of developing  a  power  system  network  in  all  its  aspects including  planning,  investigation,  research,  design  and engineering  preparation and construction  of  sub-stations, load  despatch  stations and communication  facilities,  co- ordination of regional                                                        236 and  national grid system, providing consultancy,  execution of turnkey  jobs and purchase and sale of power.  To achieve these objectives, it was decided to transfer it transmission lines   and   sub-station   of   the   various    generating organisations  and  sub-stations of the  various  generating organisation  namely (a) National Thermal Power  Corporation (NTPC),  (b) Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd.  (NPC), (c) North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd.  (NEEPCO), (d)  National Hydro-Electric Power Corporation  (NHPC),  (e) Neyveli  Lignite  Corporation Ltd. (NLC),  (f)  Tehri  Hydro Development   Corporation  Ltd.  (THDC),  (g)  Tehri   Hydro Development  Corporation  Ltd. (THDC),  (g)  Damodar  Valley Corporation (DVC), (h) Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB).      On  12th  July, 1991, the Ministry of  Power  and  Non- Conventional Energy Sources, Department of Power, Government of  India  issued  instruction to NTPC and NPTC  by  way  of follow up measure pertaining to transfer of assets,  service conditions  of  employees, their absorption etc.   The  NTPC issued  circular  dated  18.7.1991 in  confirmity  with  the aforesaid instructions of the Government of India.      The  respondent  No. 1, and  Association  of  Corporate Executive of NTPC filed a writ application in the High Court of Delhi for invalidating the aforesaid instructions of  the Government  of India and the circular issued by the NTPC  as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

violative   of  Articles  14,  16(1),  21  and  23  of   the Constitution   of  India  and  for  an  appropriate   order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus, restraining the respondents  from giving effect to Paragraph 2(1)(b) of  the instruction issued in letter dated 12.7.1991 and the  entire circular dated 18.7.1991.  It also moved an application  for interim directions.  By then, 2509 employee had already been transferred   to   NPTC.   At  the  hearing  of   the   said interlocutory  application,  the  learned  Attorney  General appearing  on behalf of the Government of India and also  on behalf  of the NPTC gave an undertaking in terms whereof  an order  was passed by the High Court on 14.8.1991. The  order so far as is relevant is extracted hereinbelow.          "We have heard the parties counsel and the Attorney          General  wishes  to  make  a  statement  giving  an          undertaking   on  behalf  of  the  National   Power          Transmission  Corporation.   He states  by  way  of          undertaking as follows:-              The  services of the above employees shall  not          be  deemed  to  be interrupted  by  National  Power          Transmission Corporation                                                        237          consequent on such transfer and absorption.               The terms and conditions of service applicable          to  these employees after transfer  and  absorption          shall  not,  in any way, be  less  favourable  then          those  applicable  to them immediately  before  the          transfer.               In  the event of retrenchment of any  employee          who  is  a  workman as defined  in  the  Industrial          Disputes Act, 1947, the National Power Transmission          corporation   shall  be  legally  liable   to   pay          compensation  on the basis of that his  service  is          continuous  and  has not been  interrupted  by  the          transfer.               That  if the writ petitioners succeed  in  the          writ   petition,  the  entire  position  shall   be          reversed, as per directions, order and any  interim          order, and all interim orders as agreed to will  be          subject to the writ petition.               That during the pendency of the writ petition,          the  National Power Transmission Corporation  shall          not recruit persons from any source other than  the          National  Thermal  Power  Corporation  without  the          permission of the Court.               We have heard the undertaking of the  Attorney          General  given on behalf of the Union of India  and          on   behalf   of   National   Power    Transmission          Corporation.   The words in the undertaking to  the          effect that transfer and absorption of employees of          the  National  Thermal  Power  Corporation  in  the          National  Power  Transmission  Corporation   shall,          however, be the matter of final adjudication of the          writ petition, and be subject thereto.               Liberty  is  given  to  both  the  parties  to          mention  the  matter in case of difficulty  and  in          case of any changed situation.  No action be  taken          unilaterally affecting which are subject matter  of          this  writ  petition  without  permission  of  this          Court.  If the assets of the National Thermal Power          Corporation  are to be transferred to the  National          Power  Transmission  Corporation,  then  prior   to          taking such action, the Court be approached."      Somedays  later,  an  application  was  filed  by   the National Power Transmission Corporation for modification  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

he following direction contained                                                        238 in paragraph 6 of the aforesaid order:          "the National Power Transmission Corporation  shall          not recruit persons from any source other than  the          National  Thermal  Power  Corporation  without  the          permission of the Court."      The  justification for making the application  was  the necessity  of the Corporation to recruit/absorb  more  hands from the generating corporations with a view to running  the corporation  effectively and efficiently for the purpose  of transmission of energy.      The Association opposed the said Motion contending that the transfer of assets and employees was illegal and neither the  Government of India nor the NTPC has a right to  change the  service  conditions of the employees  unilaterally  nor could  they force on employees a transfer to National  Power Transmission  Corporation  and against that  background  the High  Court had, on the undertaking of the learned  Attorney General,   directed   that   National   Power   Transmission corporation should not recruit persons from any source other than  the NTPC without the permission of the Court.  If  the NTPC  desired  to  recruit and  absorb  in  its  employment, employees  from other Corporations, it should pay equal  pay for equal work to its employees.  More specifically, if  the employees   to   be  recruited  by  the  NPTC   from   other Corporations  received higher emoluments, the  employees  of the  NTPC  should also be entitle on par with  employees  of other  Corporations  to higher emoluments.  The  NPTC  as  a condition  for  the  modification  and  as  a  privilege  of recruiting its employees from other Corporations should  pay higher  emoluments to the employees of NTPC as the  purchase price.  The Division Bench observed as under:-          "It  is  necessary  and  desirable  that  the   new          Corporation must be able to function by taking into          its  fold  employees  from  various  organisations,          whose transmission lines are to be taken over."          It went out:-          "In this connection we may refer to the undertaking          given  by  the learned Attorney General,  that  the          terms and conditions of service applicable to these          employees after transfer and absorption shall  not,          in   any  way,  be  less  favourable   than   those          applicable                                                        239          to them immediately before the transfer.  In  other          words,  the pay of all sorts of employees  will  be          protected.   Even  after protection of the  pay  if          certain disparity in the emoluments of various sets          of  employees  remains, we expect that  keeping  in          view the principle of equal pay for equal work  for          the   employees   who  are  placed  in   the   same          circumstances and situation, and who discharge  the          same  duties and responsibilities, and work in  the          same set of conditions, will be kept in view by the          respondents,  and such disparities, if  any,  would          normally  be  rectified  by them,  by  raising  the          salary  and allowances of the lower paid  employees          to  the level of the higher paid employees, but  at          any  rate  that  stage has not yet  come,  and  the          employees  transferred  from respondent  No.  2  to          respondent  No.3, in case they face the  situation,          they  can  always move the matter  with  respondent          No.3, or the Court.      However,  even after so holding (underlining  supplied)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

it directed that in the event:-          "some  employees  happen to get  higher  emoluments          than   some  employees  doing  equal  work,   those          employees who are transferred from respondent No. 2          to  respondent  No.  3  shall  also  get  the  same          emoluments, and the shortfall in their  emoluments,          shall  be  made up by the  respondents  by  raising          their  emoluments equal to the emoluments drawn  by          the   corresponding   employees   of   the    other          Corporations taken over by respondent No. 3, during          the pendency of the petition."      The NPTC being aggrieved by the aforesaid direction  as quoted  above issued by the High Court has moved this  Court under  Article 136 of the Constitution of India urging  that having regard to the scope of the writ petition, the reliefs sought,  the High Court was in error in directing by way  of interim  order  that  in the event  some  employees  of  the Corporations  other  than the NTPC happened  to  get  higher emoluments doing the same nature of work then the  employees of  NTPC  would  also be entitled to  get  the  said  higher emoluments.   It has been urged on behalf of  the  appellant that  the  directions  is  inconsistent  with  the   finding recorded  by the Division Bench in an earlier paragraph  and invoking  the  doctrine of equal pay for equal  work  at  an interlocutory stage is misconceived and when the various                                                        240 controversies are being examined by the High Court and  when the main writ application is being heard it was improper and inexpedient  to give by way of interim order  the  direction quoted above.      The learned Attorney General appearing for the NPTC has urged  that having regard to the instruction issued  by  the Government of India and the circular issued by the NTPC  and the undertaking given by him in the proceedings before   the High Court, the employees of NTPC are not being subjected to any  term  and condition of service less  advantageous  than those enjoyed by them before their absorption/transfer.  The scale  of pay and other emoluments which they were  enjoying before  transfer are not being affected.  However,  if  they are entitled to higher emoluments by application of doctrine of  equal pay for equal work, it is open to them to  make  a demand for the same which will be considered by the employer and if they are aggrieve, it is always open to them to  move the  Court but having regard to the nature and scope of  the writ  application the claim for equal pay for equal work  on the  ground  that some employees of some  Corporation  would receive  higher  emoluments  is outside the  scope  of  writ application  and  was  not  available  to  be  urged  on  an application moved by the Corporation for modification of  an order   restraining  it  from  recruiting   employees   from Corporations other than NTPC.  The employees of NTPC has  not come  with any independent application in that  behalf.   He has also urged that the claim was pre-mature.  He has  drawn our attention to the observation made by the Division  Bench to  the  effect that the stage for claim of  equal  pay  for equal  work has not been reached and in such eventuality  if the employees are aggrieved, they are at liberty to move the employer  or  the  Court and has submitted  that  the  third direction  in  last  paragraph  is  inconsistent  with   the aforesaid observation.      Dr.  Rajiv  Dhawan, Senior Advocate appearing  for  the Association  respondent  No. 1 has  combated  the  aforesaid submissions of the learned Attorney General submitting  that the difference in emoluments by way of higher D.A. is not by reason   of  the  experience,  ability   or   qualification.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

Inasmuch  as  transferred  employees would form  part  of  a single service, different scales of pay or emoluments  would be  unreasonable,  arbitrary and unjust.  He  has  contended that the employees of the various Corporations could not  be forcibly transferred and the High Court had restrained NPTC                                                        241 for   recruiting  from  other  sources  and  if   the   said Corporation wanted recruitment from other sources, it should be  agreeable  to  pay  to the employees  of  NTPC  also  on equitable ground higher emoluments if the employees of other Corporations  received  higher  emoluments  doing  the  same nature of work with similar responsibilities.  He has sought to  distinguish the rule laid down in the case of  State  of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. v. G. Sreenivasa Rao & Ors., [1989]  2 SCC  290 confining the holding therein to the facts  of  the said case and urged that having regard to the similar nature of  work,  ability  and experience, the  employees  of  NTPC cannot be discriminated against.      Having  heard the learned Attorney General,  Shri  P.P. Malhotra,  Shri.  G.B.  Pai and  Dr.  Rajiv  Dhawan,  Senior Advocates  at  considerable length and  giving  our  anxious consideration  to  the matter, we are of the  view  that  we should be cautious in our approach having regard to the fact that  the  Division Bench of the High Court is  hearing  the substantive  petition  since some days and  any  observation touching merit would embarrass the learned Judges who should bring  an  independent  mind to bear  on  the  controversies raised before them.  Hence we do not express any opinion  on whether  or  not  there has been a forced  transfer  of  the employees of various Corporations to NPTC and whether or not such  transfer/absorption in valid and even whether  or  not some  of the employees so absorbed can claim equal  pay  for equal work on the ground that employees of some Corporations recruited by NPTC received higher emoluments.  We are of the view that the learned Judges rightly observed that the stage for   adjudicating  the  question  raised  in  the   interim application  had  not been reached.  That  was  the  correct approach having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.      The  terms  and conditions of service of  employees  of NTPC  were  protected  in the  instructions  issued  by  the Government  of India and the circular issued by the NTPC  as also  in  the  undertaking given  by  the  learned  Attorney General.  The employees of NTPc on transfer/absorption  were not  to  suffer  any  detriment as  regards  the  terms  and conditions   of  service  enjoyed  by  them   before   their transfer/absorption.  The counsel for NPTC even did not rule out  the  possibility of ratinoalisation  of  emoluments  at later  stage  if the transfer/absorption is up-held  by  the Court.  No irreparable injury was going to be caused to  the employees of NTPC if the third                                                        242 direction  quoted  above  by us was  not  given.   The  said direction in our view militated against the observation made by  Division  Bench in an earlier paragraph which  has  been underline by us for emphasis.  If the appellant’s prayer was granted, the employees of NTPC were not in a less favourable position  than  they were.  We are, therefore, of  the  view that  the High Court at that interlocutory stage should  not have  given  the direction that if the  employees  of  other Corporations other than NTPC receive higher emoluments,  the employees of NTPC should also be entitled to the same.      We, therefore, set aside the direction (iii)  contained in last paragraph of the order passed by the Division  Bench on 21.10.1991 and allow the appeal.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7  

T.N.A.                                       Appeal allowed.                                                        243