TOPIC :EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK UNDER THE EQUAL

REMUNERATION ACT
SUBJECT : LABOUR LAW-I

SUBMIT TO: SUBMIT BY:

Dr. S.C ROY NEERAJ PRASAD

Associate professor (law) ROLL NO-758

1|Page
 contents

page no

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………..III

INTRODUCTION…… ……………………………………………….IV-VI
AIM AND OBJECTIVE

METHODOLOGY

SOURCES OF DATA

CHAPTERS

1-CONSTITTUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE…………………….………………7-12

 CASES TO UNDERSTAND EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK

2- LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE……………………………………13-14

3- PAYMENT OF REMUNERATION AT EQUAL RATES TO MEN AND WOMEN

WORKER AND OTHER MATTER…………………………………………..15-18

Conclusion……………………………………………………….………… 19

Bibliography………………………………………………….……………..20

2|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thank of gratitude to my

teacher Dr. S.C. Roy associate professor (law) of CHANAKYA
NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA . Who gave me the golden
opportunity to do this wonderful project on the topic “The
falling of the sex ratio and it impact on marriage” .Which
helped me in doing lot of research and I came to know about
so many new things .I am really thankful to them . last but not
least I wish to avail myself of this opportunity , express a
sense of gratitude and love to my friends and my beloved
parents for their manual support, strength , help and for
everything.

I am making this project not only for marks

but to also increase my knowledge.

THANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED ME

--

NEERAJ PRASAD

3|Page
 INTRODUCTION

The topic of our project is Equal Pay for Equal Work-Constitutional and Labour legislation
perspective .In our project we have tried to understand the concept of equal pay and work from
the constitutional perspective and understanding the roots of the concept from the constitution,
understanding how the concept emerged from the fundamental rights and thereon trying to
understand the inclusion of the concept in various acts, eg Equal Remuneration Act, Contract
Labour, Factories Act etc. The preamble of the Constitution of India is an introduction to the
Constitution and lays down in brief the aims and objectives of the policy framers of the Union of
India. It enunciates those socio-economic goals and ends which are to be achieved by the Indian
Constitution. These goals are multitudinous in nature and secure for the citizens of India (in
some cases for foreigners as well) a variety of rights and ensure justice, liberty, equality, and
fraternity to all. Part IV of the Constitution lays down the Directive Principle of State Policy.
This novel feature, envisaged by our Constitution, was borrowed from the Constitution of
Ireland, which itself had borrowed it from the Spanish Constitution. These Directive Principles
lay down the basic aims and objectives of the States, to be followed in the governance of the
country. They are more or less the guidelines, directing the government as to what is to be kept
in contemplation while framing the policies. They can also be termed as a distinct set of moral
duties, to be implemented by the state, while giving shape to legislations and provisions of the
State .In other words Directive Principles act as a device for making the Government conform to
the ideals, which the Constitution lays, for the attainment of democracy in its true sense i.e
.political as well as economic. This can be done only when the Government complies with these
stated objectives and makes an attempt to make India welfare state in real as well as practical
terms. They are however non-justifiable rights on the people, which set out the economic ,social
and political goals of the Indian Constitutional system, and place the government under a moral
obligation to achieve and maximize social welfare and basic social values like education,
employment, health etc .The reason for their non-enforce ability is that they impose a positive
obligation upon the state and it is while taking actions for implementing these obligations that
there arise several limitations to the Government, one such constraint being the availability of
resources. The purpose for enunciating

4|Page
the extent of enforceability of directive principles of state policy is of relevance in the present
topic because the concept of equality of pay i.e. “equal pay for equal work” being a part of these
Directive Principles is to hold the same fate as other Directive Principles. However, the Courts in
India and the Supreme Court in particular have constantly and consistently regarded the principle
of equal pay for equal work as a constitutional goal ,much higher than being a mere Directive
Principle, and have subsequently enforced it in-tandem with the fundamental rights, enshrined
under Right to Equality (Art. 14-18).The primary purpose of this research project is to study the
various interpretations which have

been made by the Supreme Court while adjudicating the cases, involving the concept of Equal
pay for Equal work as enshrined in Article 39(d) of the Constitution. The topic is of great
relevance on the contemporary world as it is being felt that considering and stating that all men
are equal is not enough but a concrete step or rather a series of steps need to be taken to bring the
concept of classless society into existence and the applicability of the concept of equal pay for
equal work is one of such steps, taken to wipe out any scope of unreasonable discrimination as
which may occur or may be followed in any form of society when it comes to payment of
remuneration. This research project is an attempt to grasp the various interpretations the concept
holds and the different analogies, which can be formed to save the people from the clutches of
irrational discrimination. An equal pay legislation such as the Equal Remuneration Act in India,
seeks to determine wages on the basis of a politically motivating or social justice related factor,
in this case ,gender. The mutual incompatibility of the two sets of factors is obvious. While the
first set might generate an efficient labour force, the second set has absolutely no relation to
productivity, and hence cannot work towards an efficient labour force .If a firm overpays, it
would eventually have to close down since it would run out of money. At the same time, if a firm
underpays, it is would still not be a profit yielding practice since it would lose employees to
competitors. To add to it, it would suffer from over optimal quit-rates, and have to invest
additionally in hiring, firing, and other training expenses. While clearly, the search for profit
would cause some entrepreneurs to set aside their taste for discrimination, it is nevertheless true
that others would be willing to incur the cost. These employers would then be paying the price of
discrimination in the form of decreased profits.

5|Page
Methodology of data

For the purpose of research the researcher will be relying on the “ Doctrinal method” ” to
look for information related to the topic equal pay for equal work under equal
remuneration act 1976”.

Sources of data

For the purpose of research the researcher will be relying on the primary and secondary
sources ” to look for information related to the topic “equal pay for equal work under
equal remuneration act 1976”.

AIM AND OBJCTIVE

The main objective to understand about the equal pay for equal work and project we have
tried to understand the concept of equal pay and work from the constitutional perspective
and understanding the roots of the concept from the constitution, understanding how the
concept emerged from the fundamental rights and thereon trying to understand the
inclusion of the concept in various acts

6|Page
 CONSTITUIONAL PERSPECTIVE
It can be seen that considering and stating that all men are equal is not enough but a concrete
step or rather a series of steps need to be taken to bring the concept of classless society into
existence and the applicability of the concept of equal pay for equal work is one of such steps,
taken to wipe out any scope of unreasonable discrimination as which may occur or maybe
followed in any form of society when it comes to payment of remuneration. The concept of
Equality of pay was incorporated under the Directive Principles of State Policy by the framers of
the Constitution so as to follow the principles of Equality and make India a welfare State i.e. a
country aimed at creating an egalitarian society. However the application of the concept of
Equality of pay was restricted only up to the discrimination on basis of gender and sex as under
the principle laid down under Article 39which states as follows; The State shall, in particular,
direct its policy towards securing that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women.
Thus the framers of the Constitution incorporated this provision to wipe out any discrimination
made against women or men in regards to the terms of pay. However, going strictly according to
the provision, it nowhere states that this concept of equality of pay is to be followed even in
terms of employment as of between man and man or woman and woman i.e. it does not grant a
right that man must be paid equally among themselves and woman among themselves if they
perform the same kind of work. The aforesaid provision also does not state any distinction
between the capacity of these men and women and that has to be constructed by the Courts
themselves.

Thus it is clear that while framers of the Constitution incorporated this provision, they only kept
in contemplation that there should not be any discrimination in terms of pay on grounds of sex or
gender of the person.It has to be stated here that though it is the primary task of the employer not
to discriminate on the basis of sex, the Constitution does not provide for any classification that
the employer can make such as on the basis of qualification and level of skill of the employee i.e.
if the workers perform the same task, they have to be treated equally without any discrimination
thereof. Article 14 of the Indian Constitution explains the concept of Equality before law. The

7|Page
concept of equality does not mean absolute equality among human beings which is physically
not possible to achieve. It is a concept implying absence of any special privilege by reason of
birth, creed or the like in favour of any individual, and also the equal subject of all individuals
and classes to the ordinary law of the land. As Dr. Jennings puts it: "Equality before the law
means that among equals the law should be equal and should be equally administered, that like
should be treated alike. It only means that all persons similarly circumstance shall be treated
alike both in the privileges conferred and liabilities imposed by the laws. Equal law should be
applied to all in the same situation, and there should be no discrimination between one person
and another. As regards the subject-matter of the legislation their position is the same. Thus, the
rule is that the like should be treated alike and not that unlike should be treated alike.

CASES TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

1. Randhir Singh v. Union of India1 In this case, the petitioner was a Driver-Constable in the
Delhi Police Force under Delhi Administration who claimed that his scale of pay should be the
same as the scale of pay of other drivers in the service of the Delhi Administration as he
discharged the same duties as the rest of the drivers in the other offices. He stated that there was
no reason whatsoever to discriminate against the petitioner and other driver-constables merely
because he and his ilk were described as constables belonging to the Police Force instead of
ordinary drivers, who had a greater pay scale. In this landmark case the court conceded that,
though the equation of posts and equations of pay were matters primarily for the Executive
Government and expert bodies like the Pay Commission and not for Courts to decide but persons
holding identical posts were not to be treated differentially in the matters of pay merely because
they belonged to different departments. It was this case in which the Court held for the first time
that though the principle of equal pay for equal work was not expressly declared by the
Constitution to be a fundamental right, it was certainly a constitutional Goal. The Court also first
time contemplated the fact that the doctrine proclaiming „Equal pay for equal work‟ for both
men and women meant „Equal pay for equal work‟ or everyone as and between sexes. The Court
extended the purview of the doctrine under Right of Equality and stated that Art.14of the

1
1982 L.L.J. 344

8|Page
Constitution enjoined the State not to deny any person equality before the law or the equal
protection of the laws and simultaneously Art. 16 declared that there shall be equality of
opportunity for all citizens .In matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under
the State and it was in this context that the doctrine of equal pay for equal work was to be
adjudged.

.2. Dharwad District PWD Literate Daily Wages Employees Association v. State of Karnataka
2
This case was brought before the Supreme Court through a series of writ petitions asking for
quashing a notification of the government of Karnataka and for issuing directions to Government
to confirm the daily rated and monthly rated employees as regular government servants and for
payment of normal salaries to those workers employed under temporary terms. The petitions
were made, pleading that about 50,000 daily-wage workers were employed in the different
Government establishments and though many of them had put in 16to 20 years of continuous
service, they were not regularized in their service and were not being paid equally, violating the
principle of equal pay for equal work as mandated by the Court. The petitions claimed for the
pay of such workmen at the rates equivalent to the minimum pay in the pay-scales of the
regularly employed workers. The Court laid that the equality clauses of the Constitution under
Articles 14 and 16 were to be construed in the light of the Preamble and Article 39(d), and it
followed that the principle. Equal pay for equal work was deducible from those Articles and
could properly be applied to cases of unequal scales of pay based on the classification or
irrational classification.

3. Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers v. Union Of India In
this case, a petition for seeking parity in pay scales was filed before the Supreme Court. The
petitioners were personal assistants and stenographers attached to the heads of the Customs and
Central Excise Departments under the Ministry of Finance. They asserted that they were
discriminated vis-à-vis personal assistants and stenographers attached to the joint secretaries and
officers above them in the Ministry. They contended that the type of work was the same and in
fact they had more work to be done. The Respondents in return emphasized that the difference in
the functional requirements of the work done was one of the points for such discrimination. The
respondents also stated that while devising the pay-scales of various posts and categories, the

2
(1991) II L.L.J. 318 (SC)

9|Page
degree of skill, experience involved, training required, responsibility taken, strain, fatigue, risk
and confidentiality undertaken, mental and physical requirements were factors borne in mind.
The Respondent also emphasised that though the duties and works were identical between the
petitioners and their counterparts attached to the Secretaries in the Secretariat, their functions
were not identical with regard to their duties and responsibilities. The Supreme Court held that
„Equal pay for equal work‟ is a fundamental right. But equal pay must depend upon the nature of
the work done and it cannot be judged by the mere volume of work. The Courtre-emphasised
that equal pay for equal work was a concomitant of Article 14 of the Constitution and it naturally
followed that equal pay for unequal work was a negation of that right. The Court also took a
great step by laying down that the interpretation of Article39(d) was to be read in the
Fundamental Rights, under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. So the principle of equal pay
for equal work, though not expressly declared by our Constitution to be a fundamental right, was
a constitutional goal. Construing Articles 14 and16 in the light of the Preamble and Article 39(d),
the Court laid that the principle of „Equal pay for equal work‟ was deducible from those articles
and was to be applied to cases of unequal scales of pay, which were based on no classification or
irrational classification

.4. Mewa Ram v. A.I.I. Medical Science Supreme Court has held that the doctrine of equal pay
for equal work is not an abstract doctrine. Equality must be among equals, un equals cannot
claim equality. Even if the duties and functions are of similar nature but if the educational
qualifications prescribed for the two posts are different and there is difference in measure of
responsibilities, the principle of equal pay for equal work would not apply. Different treatment to
persons belonging to the same class is permissible classification on the basis of educational
qualifications.

5.In Deena v. Union of India It was held that labor taken from prisoners without paying proper
remuneration was "forced labor" and violation of Art. 23 of the Constitution. The prisoners are
entitled to payment of reasonable wages for the work taken from them and the Court is under
duty to enforce their claim. There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters
relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. No citizen shall, on grounds
only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them, be ineligible
for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State. They are

10 | P a g e
however non-justifiable rights on the people, which set out the economic, social and political
goals of the Indian Constitutional system, and place the government under a moral obligation to
achieve and maximize social welfare and basic social values like education, employment, health
etc. The reason for non-enforceability, as M.P. Jain1 describes, is that they impose a positive
obligation upon the state and it is while taking actions for implementing these obligations that
there arise several limitations to the Government, one such constraint being the availability of
resources. However, the Courts in India and the Supreme Court in particular have constantly and
consistently regarded the principle of equal pay for equal work as a constitutional goal, much
higher than being a mere Directive Principle, and have subsequently enforced it in-tandem with
the fundamental rights, enshrined under Right to Equality (Art. 14-18). Article 39(d)Thus it is
clear that while framers of the Constitution incorporated this provision, they only kept in
contemplation that there should not be any discrimination in terms of pay on grounds of sex or
gender of the person. The Supreme Court continuously and consistently increasing the purview
of this doctrine has gone far off to make new interpretations so that any sort of discrimination,
unless based on reasonable grounds, does not go un-refuted. The Act does not, also, lay any
provision as to whether the qualifications of the employees are to be considered while framing
paying packages or not. The only thing which the Act point to is that the employer must not
discriminate on the basis of the sex of the worker if both man and woman are doing same or
similar kind of work. Persons holding identical posts were not to be treated differentially in the
matters of pay merely because they belonged to Different departments. It was this case in which
the Court held for the first time that though the principle of equal pay for equal work was not
expressly declared by the Constitution to be a fundamental right, it was certainly a constitutional
Goal. The Court also first time contemplated the fact that the doctrine proclaiming „Equal pay
for equal work‟ for both men and women meant „Equal pay for equal work‟ for everyone as and
between sexes. The Court also held that „the classification of persons performing the same work
into senior and junior groups with different pay will be a violation of the principle of equal pay
for equal work. ‟The apex Court held that the scope of Equal Remuneration Act would be
invited when there were any disparities of terms of pay within same levels even if the
organisation had financial constraints. The Court laid that the applicability of the Act does not
depend upon the financial ability of the management to pay equal remuneration as provided by it.
. The Supreme Court gave a landmark decision and stating the various social and material

11 | P a g e
requirements held that in addition to the principle of equal pay for equal work, the pay structure
of the employees of the government was also to reflect other social values. The degree of skill,
the strain of work, experience involved, training required ,responsibility undertaken, mental and
physical requirements, disagreeableness of the task hazards involved etc. were some of the
relevant factors which were to be taken into consideration while fixing the pay scales. The
method of recruitment, the level at which the recruitment was made in the hierarchy of service or
cadre, minimum educational and technical requirements prescribed for the post, were also some
of the relevant factors. The paying capacity of the government was also to be taken into
consideration. Thus the Court laid the complete rational and logical nexus for determination of
pays. The Court held that it could not be said that the doctrine of „Equal pay for equal work‟ was
a mere abstract doctrine and that it was not capable of being enforced in a court of law. If the
classification is proper and reasonable the doctrine of equal pay for equal work will not have any
application even though the persons doing the same work are not getting the same pay. A
temporary or casual employee performing the same duties and functions is entitled to the same
pay as paid to a permanent employee. Similarly, the difference in mode of selection will not
affect the application of the doctrine of "equal pay for equal work" if both the classes of persons
perform similar functions and duties under the same employer.

12 | P a g e
 LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Major points of consideration that have come up during our study are: The concept of equality
does not mean absolute equality among human beings which is physically not possible to
achieve. It is a concept implying absence of any special privilege by reason of birth, creed or the
like in favour of any individual, and also the equal subject of all individuals and classes to the
ordinary law of the land. Equal law should be applied to all in the same situation, and there
should be no discrimination between one person and another. The Supreme Court has held that
although the principle of equal pay for equal work is not expressly declared by our Constitution
to be a fundamental right, but it is certainly a constitutional goal under Articles 14, 16 and 39 (c)
of the Constitution3.  it has been held that the principle of equal pay for equal work is also
applicable to casual workers employed on daily wage basis4. the Supreme Court has held that
different pay scales can be fixed for government servants holding same post and performing
similar work on the basis of difference in degree of responsibility, reliability and confidentiality,
and as such it will not be violative of the principle of equal pay for equal work, implicit in
Article 14. The Court said, "Equal pay must depend upon the nature of the work done. It cannot
be judged by the mere volume of work. There may be qualitative difference as regards reliability
and responsibility.5Gender inequities throughout the world are among the most all-pervasive
forms of in equality. Gender equality concerns each and every member of the society and forms
the very basis of a just society and hence, the issue of „gender justice‟ is of enormous magnitude

3
Randhir Singh v. Union of India
4
Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P
5
F.A.I.C. and C.E.S. v. Union of India
13 | P a g e
and of mammoth ramification engulfing an all-embracing and illimitable canvas. In the midnight
of August 15, 1947, when India awoke to “life and freedom”, most of its 170 million women
.scarcely knew what the „Tryst with Destiny‟ was all about. Victims of poverty, ignorance and
oppressive social institutions, they hardly knew their destiny and who controlled it. However, the
stalwarts who led India to its independence were aware that if the new India of their dreams was
to become a reality and not remain only a figment of imagination, it would need social
engineering on a massive scale, in respect of the backward and oppressed sections of the society
and above all, its women. It has to be stated here that though it is the primary task of the
employer not to discriminate on the basis of sex (as made mandatory by the Supreme Court in
recent judgments), the Constitution does not provide for any classification that the employer can
make such as on the basis of qualification and level of skill of the employee i.e. if the workers
perform the same task, they have to be treated equally without any discrimination thereof.
Though the articles peaks only as to discrimination between man and woman, the concept of
equal pay for equal work has been applied in generality to all without any hint of gender or class.
The Supreme Court continuously and consistently increasing the purview of this doctrine has
gone far off to make new interpretations so that any sort of discrimination, unless based on
reasonable grounds, does not go un-refuted. The very purpose and nature of the said article has
been changed by the apex court and the article which was originally instilled to support woman
in there right of equal status is now applied to now employed to nullify any sort of rule and
provision which tends to affect the rights of workers to get equal pay if they perform the same
kind of work in similar organizations. However the Supreme Court has added a new clause to the
article in the way of reasonable nexus of discrimination . This reasonable nexus includes the
qualifications of the employees, capacity of the workers and many more. The list is endless and
new points of classifications are incorporated in it as and when the Supreme Court says so.In the
coming part of the document, we have tried to study the Equal Pay for Equal Work-from the
Labour legislation perspective, by studying the different acts-

1. EQUAL REMUNERATION ACT, 1976For the purpose of incorporating and giving effect to
the Constitutional directive of Equal pay for equal work, The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 was
passed. The objects and reasons of the Act states that President of India promulgated The Equal
Remuneration Ordinance, 1975on 26th September, 1975 so that the provision of Art. 39(d) was
implemented in the year, which was being celebrated as the International Woman‟s Year. The

14 | P a g e
ordinance was brought to effect to provide for payment of Equal Remuneration to both man and
woman workers for the same work or work of similar nature and for the prevention of
discrimination on grounds of sex

CHAPTER – II

PAYMENT OF REMUNERATION AT EQUAL RATES TO MEN AND WOMEN

WORKERS AND OTHER MATTERS

4. Duty of employer to pay equal remuneration to men and women workers for same work or
work of a similar nature. -- (1) No employer shall pay to any worker, employed by him in an
establishment or employment, remuneration, whether payable in cash or in kind, at rates less
favourable than those at which remuneration is paid by him to the workers of the opposite sex in
such establishment or employment for performing the same work or work of a similar nature.

(2) No employer shall, for the purpose of complying with the provisions of sub-section
(1), reduce the rate of remuneration of any worker.

(3) Where, in an establishment or employment, the rates of remuneration payable before the
commencement of this Act for men and women workers for the same work or work of a
similar nature are different only on the ground of sex, then the higher (in cases where there
are only two rates), or, as the case may be, the highest (in cases where there are only two
rates), of such rates shall be the rate at which remuneration shall be payable, on and from
such commencement, to such men and women workers:

Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to entitle a worker to the revision of the
rate of remuneration payable to him or her with reference to the service rendered by him or her
before the commencement of this Act.

In M/s .Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. ltd. V. Andrey D’costa an another a female confidential
stenographer after the termination of her services filed a petition under sub section 1 of section 7
of equal remuneration act 1976 complaining that during period of service she was paid
remuneration at lesser rate than those male stenographer who were also performing the same or

15 | P a g e
similar work. It Was held that in order to get relief under section 4 of the act the employee
should establish that the remuneration paid by the employer whether payable in cash or kind, is
being paid at rates less favorable than those at which remuneration is paid by him to the
employee of the opposite sex in such establishment for performing the same work or work of
similar nature. Whether the work is similar in nature as another work can be determined on three
consideration First the authority should take a broad view as also a broad approach should be
adopted in ascertaining whether any difference are of practical nature. Secondly actual duties
performed should be looked at and not those theoretically possible. In making comparison the
authority should look at the duties generally performed by men women. Thirdly where both men
and women work at inconvenient times there is no requirement that all those who work at night
shall be paid the same basic rate as those who work during normal day shifts.

It was further held that it may be that the management was not employing any male as
confidential stenographer attached to the senior Executives in the establishment and that there
was no transfer of confidential lady stenographers where male were working. It, however, ought
not to make any difference for purpose of application of the act when once it is established that
the lady stenographer were doing practically, the same kind of work which the male
stenographer were discharging.6

It was also held that the act doe7s not permit the management to pay to a section of its employees
doing the same work or work of a similar nature lesser pay contrary to section 4(1) o fthe act
because of it financial position which does not permit payment of equal remuneration to all. The
applicability of the act does not depend the financial ability of management to pay equal
remuneration as provided by the act.

5. No discrimination to be made while recruiting men and women workers. -- On and

from the commencement of this Act, no employer shall, while making recruitment for the same
work or work of a similar nature, 8[or in any condition of service subsequent to recruitment such
as promotions, training or transfer], make any discrimination against women except where the
employment of women in such work is prohibited or restricted by or under any law for the time
being in force:

Provided that the provisions of this section shall not affect any priority or reservation for
scheduled castes or scheduled tribes, ex-servicemen, retrenched employees of any other class or
category of persons in the matter of recruitment to the posts in an establishment or employment.

6
Mackenzie Mackinnon & Co. LTD. V. Andrey D’costa and another, (1987) I L.L.J. 536
7
Ibid.
8
Inserted by Act 49 of 1987, S.2

16 | P a g e
6. Advisory Committee. -- (1) For the purpose of providing increasing employment
opportunities for women, the appropriate Government shall constitute one or more Advisory
Committees to advise it with regard to the extend to which women may be employed in such
establishments or employments as the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this
behalf.

(2) Every Advisory Committee shall consist of not less than ten persons, to be nominated by the
appropriate Government, of which one-half shall be women.

(3) In tendering its advice, the Advisory Committee shall have regard to the number of women
employed in the concerned establishment or employment, the nature of work, hours of work,
suitability of women for employment, as the case may be, the need for providing increasing
employment opportunities for women, including part-time employment, and such other
relevant factors as the Committee may think fit.

(4) The Advisory Committee shall regulate its own procedure.

(5) The appropriate Government may, after considering the advice tendered to it by the Advisory
Committee and after giving to the persons concerned in the establishment or employment an
opportunity to make representations, issue such directions in respect of employment of
women workers, as the appropriate Government may think fit.

7. Power of appropriate Government to appoint authorities for hearing and deciding claims
and complaints. -- (1) The appropriate Government may, by notification, appoint such officers,
not below the rank of a Labour Officer, as it thinks fit to be the authorities for the purpose of
hearing and deciding—

(a) complaints with regard to the contravention of any provision of this Act;

(b) claims arising out of non-payment of wages at equal rates to men and women workers for
the same work or work of a similar nature,

and may, by the same or subsequent notification, define the local limits within which each, such
authority shall exercise its jurisdiction.

(2) Every complaint or claim referred to in sub-section (1) shall be made in such manner as
may be prescribed.

(3) If any question arises as to whether two or more works are of the same nature or of a
similar nature, it shall be decided by the authority appointed under sub-section (1).

17 | P a g e
(4) Where a complaint or claim is made to the authority appointed under sub-section (1) it
may, after giving the applicant and the employer an opportunity of being heard, and after such
inquiry as it may consider necessary, direct, —

(i) in the case of a claim arising out of a non-payment of wages at equal rates to men and
women workers for the same work or work of a similar nature, that payment be made
to the worker of the amount by which the wages payable to him exceed the amount
actually paid;

(ii) in the case of complaint, that adequate steps be taken by the employer so as to ensure
that there is no contravention of any provision of this Act.

(5) Every authority appointed under sub-section (1) shall have all the powers of a Civil Court
under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), for the purpose of taking evidence and of
enforcing the attendance of witnesses and compelling the production of documents, and every
such authority shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and
Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).

(6) Any employer or worker aggrieved by any order made by an authority appointed under
sub-section (1), on a complaint or claim may, within thirty days from the date of the order, prefer
an appeal to such authority as the appropriate Government may, by notification, specify in this
behalf, and that authority may, after hearing the appeal, confirm, modify or reverse the order
appealed against and no further appeal shall lie against the order made by such authority.

(7) The authority referred to in sub-section (6) may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was
prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period specified in sub-
section (6), allow the appeal to be preferred within a further period of thirty days but not
thereafter.

(8) The provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
(14 of 1947), shall apply for the recovery of monies due from an employer arising out of
decision of an authority appointed under this section.

18 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

. The various provisions for the payment of remuneration at equal rates are provided in ChapterII
of the Act and almost all the provisions point to similar ends and ultimately direct the employers
not to practice discrimination while recruitment, while payment or even while considering
employees for promotion. The Act also provides for maintenance of registers in the
organisations, creation of posts of Inspectors and other related offices to keep a check on such
prejudiced practices, which are likely to affect the provisions of the Act. It speaks extensively of
what the employers have to follow but is silent on the point of reasonable classification with the
apex court has pointed out freely and exhaustively. The Act does not, also, lay any provision as
to whether the qualifications of the employees are to be considered while framing paying
packages or not. The only thing which the Act point to is that the employer must not discriminate
on the basis of the sex of the worker if both man and womanare doing same or similar kind of
work. Thus it is merely an enactment of Article 39(d) of the Constitution in its strict sense,
leaving the scope of interpretation to the Courts.

SUGGESTIONS

1. The equal remuneration act should not focus only on gender discrimination.

2. Equal pay for equal work should be mentioned as constitutional goal in writing so that it can
be implemented strictly.

3. The degree of skill, the strain of work, experience involved, training required, responsibility
undertaken, mental and physical requirements, disagreeableness of the task, hazards involved
etc. were some of the relevant factors which were to be taken into consideration while fixing the

19 | P a g e
pay scales. The method of recruitment, the level at which the recruitment was made in the
hierarchy of service or cadre, minimum educational and technical requirements prescribed for
the post, were also some of the relevant factors.

4. The criteria to define equal work should be clearly mentioned.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 www.lawyersclubindia.com
 www.indiankanoon.com
 http://www.indianlawcases.com/

Acts

 General clauses Act, 1897

 Equal remuneration act 1976

Books

Mishra .s.n, Labour and industrial laws, 27th edition, central law
publication,Allahabad, 2013.

Dr Goswami, labour laws, central law agency, Allahabad, 2012

Chaturvedi, labour laws, central law agency, Allahabad, 2012

20 | P a g e