{"id":123103,"date":"1988-06-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1988-06-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988"},"modified":"2017-10-22T13:48:49","modified_gmt":"2017-10-22T08:18:49","slug":"jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","title":{"rendered":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1988 AIR 1504, \t\t 1988 SCR Supl. (1) 411<\/div>\n
Author: K Singh<\/div>\n
Bench: Singh, K.N. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nJAIPAL & OTHERS\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT02\/06\/1988\n\nBENCH:\nSINGH, K.N. (J)\nBENCH:\nSINGH, K.N. (J)\nKANIA, M.H.\n\nCITATION:\n 1988 AIR 1504\t\t  1988 SCR  Supl. (1) 411\n 1988 SCC  (3) 354\t  JT 1988 (2)\t528\n 1988 SCALE  (1)1198\n CITATOR INFO :\n RF\t    1989 SC  19\t (27)\n F\t    1989 SC1256\t (4)\n C\t    1989 SC1308\t (8,10)\n F\t    1990 SC 883\t (7)\n RF\t    1991 SC1173\t (6)\n\n\nACT:\n     Constitution of India: Articles 14 and 39(d)-'Equal pay\nfor Equal  Work'-Constitutional\t obligation  of\t the  State-\nDifference it  mode of\tselection for  posts  not  material-\nSimilar\t functions  and\t duties\t under\tthe  same  employer-\nRelevancy of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     In the  State of  Haryana\ttwo  identical\tschemes\t are\nsimultaneously in  operation with  the object  of  imparting\nliteracy (functional and awareness) to adult illiterates and\nto provide  literacy to\t children keeping  away from school.\nThe first scheme, known as the Adult and Nonformal Education\nScheme, is  financed by\t the Central  Government  under\t its\nRural  Functional   Literacy   Programme\/Project,   but\t  is\nadministered by\t the State  Government. Under this scheme, a\nnumber of Adult Education Centres have been opened to impart\nliteracy  to   adult  illiterates.   The  petitioners\twere\nappointed as  Instructors  at  these  centres  on  different\ndates. They  are being\tpaid a\tfixed salary  of Rs.200\t per\nmonth. The  petitioners are  given a deliberate break of one\nday in their service after the lapse of every six months and\nhave thus  been treated\t temporary in  service.\t The  second\nscheme, known as the State Social Education Scheme, has been\nframed by  the State  of Haryana.  Under this  scheme Social\nEducation Centres have been opened in the State and teachers\nknown as Squad Teachers appointed at these centres to impart\nliteracy among\tthe illiterates.  The State  regularised the\nservices of  the Squad Teachers working on ad-hoc basis with\neffect from  1.1.1980  and  sanctioned\tthem  pay  scale  of\nRs.420-700, the\t scale applicable to primary school teachers\nin the State.\n     The Petitioners'  grievance is  that although  they are\nperforming the\tsame  nature  of  functions  and  duties  as\nperformed by  the Squad\t Teachers, they\t are denied the same\nscale of  pay. The  petitioners pray  for the  issuance of a\nwrit, order  or direction  to the  respondents (i)  to treat\nthem in\t continuous service  irrespective of  the deliberate\nbreaks in  their service,  (ii) to  grant them\tregular\t pay\nscales of  the Primary\tSchool Teachers\t plus  consequential\nbenefits from  the date\t of their  initial appointment,\t and\n(iii) to  treat the  Department of  Adult Education and Non-\nformal Education as a permanent department and to regularise\nthe\n412\nservices of the petitioners in that Department.\n     The claim\tof the\tpetitioners is based on the doctrine\nof 'equal  work equal pay'. The petitioners contend that (i)\nthe two\t schemes are  similar and  the nature  of duties and\nfunctions performed  by instructors  are  similar  to  those\nperformed by squad teachers, (ii) the instructors as well as\nthe Squad  Teachers are both appointed by the District Adult\nEducation officer  and function under the supervision of the\nDirectorate of\tEducation, (iii)  the instructors  are\tfull\ntime employees\tand take  regular classes of students in the\nage group  of 5-15  years for  two and\ta half\thours and of\nadult illiterates  in the  age-group of\t 15-35 years for one\nand a  half hours.  In addition,  they have  to motivate the\nchildren and the adults to join the Adult Education Centres.\nThey are further required to submit regular survey reports.\n     The respondents,  on the  other  hand,  urge  that\t the\nfunctions and  duties  of  the\tinstructors  and  the  squad\nteachers are quite different. The main points of distinction\nrelied upon  are that (i) the instructors are appointed part\ntime while  squad teachers are in full time employment, (ii)\nthe squad  teachers are\t transferable while  instructors are\nnot, (iii)  the squad teachers are required to teach 7 hours\ndaily while  instructors are  required\tto  teach  for\tfour\nhours, (iv)  the social\t education scheme  is permanent\t and\nsquad teachers\tare working  under a  permanent scheme while\nthe instructors\t are working  under a  temporary scheme, and\n(v) the\t qualifications\t and  the  mode\t of  recruitment  of\ninstructors  are   different;  while   the  instructors\t are\nappointed locally,  the squad  teachers are  selected by the\nSubordinate Service  Selection Board  after  competing\twith\ncandidates from\t any part  of the  country. It is emphasized\nthat  if   a  regular\tselection  was\theld,  many  of\t the\nInstructors may not have been appointed.\n     Earlier, this  court had  in Bhagwan  Das v.  State  of\nHaryana,  [1987]   4  SCC   634\t upheld\t the  claim  of\t the\nSupervisors appointed  to supervise  the  centres  at  which\ninstructors have been working under the Adult and Non-formal\nEducation Scheme  for the  grant of the same scale of pay as\nhas been sanctioned to the Head Squad Teachers of the Social\nEducation Scheme.\n     In partly allowing the writ petitions, this Court,\n^\n     HELD: (1)\tThere is  no difference\t in  the  nature  of\nduties of  the instructors  and squad  teachers and  both of\nthem carry  out similar\t work under  the same  employer. The\nfunctions and duties of both classes of\n413\npersons are  primarily directed\t to  advance  the  cause  of\neducation to  bring social awareness among the people in the\nrural areas  and  to  create  interest\tin  various  social,\neconomic and  educational  activities.\tBringing  adults  to\ncentres for educating them is a difficult task and to impart\neducation to dropout children is not an easy job. One of the\nmain duties of the instructors is to motivate the adults and\ndropout children  to participate  in the  activities and  to\nmotivate them  for taking  education. The  instructors teach\nfour hours  a day and thereafter they have to do survey work\nand motivation\twork. In  addition to  that, the instructors\nare required  to  carry\t out  additional  duties  which\t are\nassigned to them by the Department. Further, the instructors\nare required  to organise  sports like\tkho-kho, kabadi\t and\nathletics, and\tto participate in the local functions and to\nmotivate affluent  villagers to give donations for the adult\neducation scheme. [420C-E; 421D-E]\n     (2) Having\t regard to their duties and functions, it is\ndifficult  to\tuphold\tthe   respondents'  plea   that\t the\ninstructors are\t part-time employees  as they  work only for\nfour hours. [421E]\n     (3) If  the two class of persons do same work under the\nsame employer,\twith similar  responsibility, under  similar\nworking conditions,  the doctrine  of 'equal work equal pay'\nwould apply  and it  would not\tbe  open  to  the  State  to\ndiscriminate one  class with  the other\t in  paying  salary.\n[421F-G]\n     (4) The  State is\tunder a constitutional obligation to\nensure that  equal pay is paid for equal work. Article 39(d)\ncontained in  Part IV  of the Constitution ordains the State\nto direct  its policy  towards securing 'equal pay for equal\nwork' for  both men and women. Though Article 39 is included\nin the\tChapter of Directive Principles of State Policy, but\nit is  fundamental in  nature. The purpose of the article is\nto fix\tcertain social\tand economic  goals for avoiding any\ndiscrimination amongst\tthe people  doing  similar  work  in\nmatters relating to pay. [421G; 422B-C]\n     (5) The  doctrine of 'equal work equal pay' would apply\non the\tpremise of  similar work,  but it does not mean that\nthere should be complete identity in all respects. [421F]\n     (6) A  temporary or casual employee performing the same\nduties and  functions is entitled to the same pay as paid to\na permanent employee. [422D]\n     (7) The plea that instructors are not transferable does\nnot affect\n414\nthe doctrine  of equal\tpay for\t equal work. The instructors\nare appointed  A  locally  because  they  are  in  a  better\nposition to  motivate the  adults and  dropout children\t for\nparticipating in  the  scheme,\twhile  an  outsider  may  be\nhandicapped in motivating the local residents. [423C-D]\n     (8) Minimum  qualification for  the Instructors as well\nas the\tSquad Teachers is Matric, though many among both are\ngraduates and  some of them are trained teachers. Though the\nInstructors belong  to the  locality where  they  have\tbeen\nposted, but  they are  appointed only  after selection.\t The\ndifference  in\t mode  of  selection  will  not\t affect\t the\napplication of\tthe doctrine  of `equal\t work equal  pay' if\nboth the  class of  persons perform  similar  functions\t and\nduties under the same employer. [423D-E]\n     (9) The  instructors are entitled to the same pay scale\nas sanctioned  to squad\t teachers. The\tpay of\teach of\t the\npetitioners shall  be fixed  having regard  to the length of\nservice with effect from the date of his initial appointment\nby ignoring  the break\tin service  on account of six months\nfresh appointments.  The petitioners  will  be\tentitled  to\nincrements  in\t the  pay   scale  in  accordance  with\t law\nnotwithstanding the  break in  service that might have taken\nplace. These  directions shall\tbe implemented\twith  effect\nfrom September 1, 1985. [424A-C]\n     10.  The  petitioners'  claim  for\t regularising  their\nservices in the departments cannot be accepted as admittedly\nthe project  of Adult and Non-formal Education is temporary.\n[424C-D]\n     Bhagwan Dass  v. State  of Haryana,<\/a>  [1987] 4  SCC 634;\nRanjit Singh  v. Union\tof India,<\/a>  [1982] 3  SCR 298; Dhiren\nChamoli v.  State of  U.P., [1986]  1 SCC  637 and  Surinder\nSingh v.  Engineer-in-Chief CPWD,  & Ors.,  [1986] 1 SCC 639\nreferred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) Nos.
\n455, 597,  635, 636,  777\/1986, 1518,  1686\/1987, 77, 78 and
\n395 of 1988.\n<\/p>\n
     (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
\n     Govinda  Mukhoty\tand  Mrs.   Rekha  Pandey   for\t the
\nPetitioners.\n<\/p>\n
     Madhusudan Rao, Mahabir Singh, M. Satya Narayan Rao and
\nC.V.S. Rao for the Respondents.\n<\/p>\n
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n415<\/span>
\n     SINGH,  J.\t The  petitioners  in  all  these  ten\twrit
\npetitions filed\t under Article\t32 of  the  Constitution  of
\nIndia have  raised grievance  of discrimination\t against the
\nState of  Haryana in  not following  the doctrine  of “equal
\nwork equal pay”.\n<\/p>\n
     The petitioners  are working  as instructors  under the
\nAdult and  Non-formal Education\t Scheme under  the Education
\nDepartment  of\t Haryana.  The\t object\t of  the  Non-formal
\nEducation and  Adult Education\tScheme is to impart literacy
\n(functional and\t awareness) to\tthe adult illiterates in age
\ngroup of 15-35 years and to provide literacy to the children
\nin the\tage group  of 5-15  years who are drop-outs from the
\nprimary and  middle school  level or  who never\t joined\t any
\nregular school.\t A number  of Adult  Education Centres\thave
\nbeen opened  in the  State of  Haryana, which are maintained
\nunder the Rural Functional Literacy Programme\/Project (RELP)
\nof the\tCentral Government,  administered by  the  State  of
\nHaryana although  expenditure in  respect of  the project is
\nborne  by  the\tCentral\t Government.  The  petitioners\twere
\nappointed  instructors\t to   impart   literacy\t  to   adult
\nilliterates  at\t  these\t Centres  on  different\t dates.\t The
\nstudents who  are taught by the petitioners are permitted to
\nappear at  the Vth standard (primary examinations) conducted
\nby the\tEducation Department  of the  State. On\t passing the
\nexamination the\t students are issued a certificate of having
\npassed primary examination. On the basis of that certificate
\nstudents are  eligible for  admission to  6th class  in\t the
\nregular schools\t maintained by\tthe  State  Government.\t The
\npetitioners were appointed instructors by the District Adult
\nEducation officers  of each district between 1978 to 1985 on
\nthe basis  of  selection  held\tby  a  Selection  Committee.
\nInitially the  petitioners were\t paid a\t fixed salary of Rs.
\n150 per\t month but since April 1983 it has been increased to
\nRs.200 per month. Minimum qualifications for being appointed
\nan  instructor\tis  matric,  many  of  the  instructors\t are
\ngraduates while some of them also hold junior basic training
\ncertificates. The  petitioners are  given a deliberate break
\nof one day after the lapse of every six months and have thus
\nbeen treated  temporary in  service notwithstanding the fact
\nthat they have been continuously working ever since the date
\nof their  appointment. There  is  another  scheme  known  as
\nSocial\tEducation   scheme  in\tthe  State  of\tHaryana\t for
\nimparting education  to illiterates  in\t the  villages,\t the
\nscheme is  known as  State Adult  Education Programme  also.
\nUnder that  scheme a number of social education centres have
\nbeen opened.  The teachers  employed under  that scheme were
\nknown as  squad teachers  who run  the centres.\t In 1981 the
\nhead squad  teachers and  squad teachers were regularised as
\nhead teachers  and teachers,  and granted the benefit of pay
\nscale applicable to regular
\n416<\/span>
\nhead-masters and  teachers of  primary schools maintained by
\nthe State  A Government.  The petitioners’ grievance is that
\nalthough they  are performing  the same\t nature of functions
\nand duties  as performed  by the squad teachers but they are
\ndenied the  same scale\tof pay instead they are being paid a
\nfixed salary  of Rs.200 per month. The relief claimed by the
\npetitioners in\tall these  petitions  is  identical  in\t the
\nfollowing terms\n<\/p>\n
\t  (a) Issue  a writ in the nature of mandamus or any
\n\t  appropriate writ,  order  or\tdirection  that\t the
\n\t  petitioners continue\tto be  in the service of the
\n\t  respondents  from   the  date\t  of  their  initial
\n\t  appointment  irrespective   of   their   being   a
\n\t  deliberate break  in\ttheir  services\t during\t the
\n\t  vacation period.\n<\/p>\n
\t       (b)  Issue  an  appropriate  writ,  order  or
\n\t  direction  to\t  the\trespondents   to   put\t the
\n\t  petitioners on  regular  pay\tscales\tto  that  of
\n\t  primary   school   teachers\tin   the   Education
\n\t  Department of\t Haryana  plus\tother  consequential
\n\t  benefits  from   the\t date\tof   their   initial
\n\t  appointment and  further direct the respondents to
\n\t  pay the  petitioners the  difference in arrears of
\n\t  salary accrued  to them  from the  date  of  their
\n\t  initial appointment.\n<\/p>\n
\t       (c)  Issue  by  appropriate  writ,  order  or
\n\t  direction that  the Department  of Adult Education
\n\t  and Non-formal Education is a permanent department
\n\t  of the  State and  the petitioners are regularised
\n\t  teachers  in\t the  Department  appointed  against
\n\t  sanctioned posts of instructors.\n<\/p>\n
     There is  no dispute  that the  State  of\tHaryana\t has
\nframed its  own scheme\tfor  imparting\teducation  to  Adult
\nilliterates in\tthe villages,  this scheme  is known  as the
\nState Social  Education Scheme.\t Under this scheme the State
\nof Haryana  has opened\tsocial education  centres in various
\nDistricts. These  centres have\tbeen functioning  under\t the
\nDepartment  of\tEducation  where  teachers  known  as  squad
\nteachers  have\t been  imparting  literacy,  functional\t and
\nawareness among the illiterates. The State of Haryana by its
\norder dated  20.1.1981 regularised the services of the squad
\nteachers working  on ad-hoc  basis with effect from 1.1.1980
\nand sanctioned\tthem pay  scale\t of  Rs.420-700,  the  scale
\napplicable to  primary\tschool\tteachers  in  the  State  of
\nHaryana. The petitioners claim that the job and functions of
\nthe instructors\t are similar  to squad\tteachers for running
\nthe social educa-\n<\/p>\n
417<\/span><\/p>\n
tion centres,  therefore they  are also entitled to the same
\npay scale  as granted to squad teachers. At this stage it is
\nnecessary  to\tnote  that   supervisors  are  appointed  to
\nsupervise the various centres at which instructors have been
\nworking under  the Adult  Education and\t Nonformal Education
\nScheme. A  number of  supervisors filed\t a writ\t petition in
\nthis Court  under Article  32 of  the Constitution  claiming
\nsame scale  of pay  as granted to head squad teachers of the
\nSocial Education  Scheme. Their\t claim was  upheld  by\tthis
\nCourt in  Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana,<\/a> [1987] 4 SCC 634
\nand direction  was issued  sanctioning the same scale of pay
\nto them as has been sanctioned to the head squad teachers of
\nthe Social  Education Scheme. The petitioners’ claim that as
\nthe supervisors\t who supervise\ttheir work have been granted
\npay scale  applicable to head squad teachers the petitioners
\nare also  entitled to  the pay\tscale  applicable  to  squad
\nteachers of the Social Education Scheme .\n<\/p>\n
     The  main\t controversy  raised   on  behalf   of\t the
\nrespondents is\tthat the  instructors do not perform similar
\nduties as performed by the squad teachers. It was urged that
\nthe nature of duties of instructors are quite different than
\nthose performed\t by the squad teachers. The petitioners have
\nstated that  the instructors  are full\ttime employees\tthey
\ntake regular  classes of  students in the age group of S- 15
\nyears for two and a half hours and they further take classes
\nfor adult  illiterates in  the age  group of 15-35 years for
\none and\t a half hours. This is not disputed. The petitioners
\nfurther contended  that in  addition to\t four hours teaching
\nwork they  have to  motivate the  children and the adults to
\njoin the  centres  for\tgetting\t free  education.  They\t are
\nrequired to  submit survey  reports to\tthe department every
\nsix months giving details as to how many children in the age
\ngroup of  5-15 years  are not  going to\t the schools and how
\nmany adult  persons are\t illiterate in\ttheir villages.\t The
\npetitioners  further   assert  that   adult  education\t and
\nnonformal education  programme which  is implemented  by the
\ninstructors is\tsimilar to  social education  programme. The
\ninstructors as\twell as\t squad teachers\t of social education
\nscheme are appointed by the District Adult Education officer
\nand both  these class  of persons function under the control
\nand supervision of the Joint Director, Adult Education under
\nthe Directorate\t of Education  of the  State of Haryana. The
\nduties of  instructors as  contained in\t Chapter II  of\t the
\nInformal  Education   Instructors  Guide  published  by\t the
\nHaryana Government, Directorate of Education, are specified,
\na copy of the same has been annexed to the affidavit of Prem
\nChand one  of the petitioners. The duties of the instructors
\nas prescribed therein are as under:\n<\/p>\n
418<\/span><\/p>\n
\t  “DUTIES OF THE INSTRUCTOR
\n\t  (A) AS ORGANISER OF THE CENTRE\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  1. To contact the villagers and their children who
\n\t  can be given education at the centre;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  2. To\t survey the  villages to  know who  are\t the
\n\t  children who\tcan be\tbrought to  the\t centre\t for
\n\t  teaching;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  3. To tell the villages about the aims and objects
\n\t  of education programme; and
\n\t  (4) To form local co-ordinating bodies.
\n\t  (B) AS A TEACHER\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  1. To\t complete the syllabus in time and to create
\n\t  interest in the children by his teaching;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  2. The  instructor must be aware of multiple class
\n\t  and group teaching systems;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  3. He\t should give examples of village life and to
\n\t  link it with education; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  4.  To   make\t cultural   activities\ta   part  of
\n\t  education.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (C) AS ADMISTRATOR OF THE CENTRE\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  1. To\t contact such  students who are irregular or
\n\t  late\tcomers\t to  the  centre  and  to  encourage
\n\t  them\/their  parents\tto   send   their   children
\n\t  regularly to the centre;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  2. To keep records of the following:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t     (i) personal  details  of\tchildren  and  their
\n\t\tprogress charts;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t   (ii) Their timely evaluation;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (iii) The  details of\t admission of  children from
\n\t\tInformal  Education Centre (3rd, 4th and 5th
\n\t\tclass) to formal school;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
419<\/span><\/p>\n
\t   (iv)\t Copy of  the monthly progress and copies of
\n\t\treports sent to the Supervising and Planning
\n\t\toffices and copies of other reports.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The aforesaid  publication issued  by the Government further
\nstates that  Haryana is the first State which has integrated
\nthe two\t schemes, namely,  Informal Education  Programme and
\nAdult Education Programme.\n<\/p>\n
     In the  counter-affidavit\tof  J.K.  Tandon,  Assistant
\nDirector, Adult Education, it is stated that the instructors
\nwho are\t seeking equality  with the squad teachers of Social
\nEducation Scheme  are quite  different. The social education
\nsquad teachers\tare mobile  in nature and they move from one
\nvillage to  another, after completing their job in a village
\nwhereas in  the case  of instructors  they are employed from
\nthe same village and are from the nearby villages, the squad
\nteachers are  full  time  employees  and  teaching  work  is
\ncarried out  by them for full day. However, in his affidavit
\nShri Tandon could not dispute the duties as mentioned in the
\nInformal  Education  Instructors  Guide\t (extracted  above).
\nAnother counter-affidavit  has been  filed by Sabira Khosla,
\nDeputy Director,  Adult Education,  in that  affidavit it is
\nstated that  the squad teachers are full time employees they
\nwork for  6-7 hours  and besides  working at  night during 6
\np.m. to 10 p.m. they do social work also. Another additional
\naffidavit has  been filed  on behalf  of the  respondents by
\nS.R. Kaushal, Assistant Director of School Education. In his
\naffidavit he has stated that social education squad teachers
\nperform various\t duties under the Social Education Programme
\nwhich is divided into various divisions as under:\n<\/p>\n
     1. Education division.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     2. Debate and discussion division.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     3. Sports division.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     4. Cultural activity division.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     5. Social service division.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It is  stated that  the\t squad\tteachers  undertake  various
\nfunctions to  supplement the  programme under  the aforesaid
\ndivisions. He  has pointed out the difference in the working
\nof the instructors and the squad teachers. The main point of
\ndistinction relied upon by him is
\n420<\/span>
\nthat the  instructors are  appointed part-time\twhile  squad
\nteachers and  JBT teachers  are\t in  full  time\t employment.
\nSocial\teducation  squad  teachers  are\t transferable  while
\ninstructors are\t not transferable. A social squad teacher is
\nrequired to  teach 7  hours daily  while  an  instructor  is
\nrequired to  teach for\tfour  hours.  The  social  education
\nscheme is  permanent and  squad teachers are working under a
\npermanent scheme  while the  instructors are working under a
\ntemporary scheme.\n<\/p>\n
     We have given our anxious consideration to the material
\nplaced before  us. On a careful analysis of the same we find
\nthat  the  nature  of  duties  and  functions  performed  by
\ninstructors  are   similar  to\t those\tperformed  by  squad
\nteachers. The  functions  and  duties  of  both\t classes  of
\npersons are  primarily directed\t to  advance  the  cause  of
\neducation to  bring social awareness among the people in the
\nrural  areas  and  to  create  interest\t in  various  social
\neconomic and  educational  activities.\tBringing  adults  to
\ncentre for  educating them is a difficult task and to impart
\neducation to  drop-outs children  is not an easy job. One of
\nthe main duties of the instructors is to motivate the adults
\nand drop  out children\tto participate in the activities and
\nto motivate them for taking education. The instructors teach
\nfour hours  a day and thereafter they have to do survey work
\nand motivation\twork in addition to that the instructors are
\nrequired to  carry out\tadditional duties which are assigned
\nto them by the Department. This is evident from the circular
\nletter dated  4.3.1987 issued  by the  Joint Director, Adult
\nEducation (Annexure  B) to  the affidavit  of Rajinder Singh
\npetitioner. The letter was circulated to all the instructors
\nof adult and informal education, it reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
\t  “Dear
\n\t       To  bring   adults  in\tcentres\t is  a\tvery
\n\t  difficult task.  This is  possible only  when\t our
\n\t  centres are  attractive and  adults feel  happy to
\n\t  come to  the centres\tand forget all their worries
\n\t  after coming\tto the\tCentre.\t Instructors  should
\n\t  behave with  the adults  in such  a way  that they
\n\t  think him  their  friend  and\t guide.\t The  adults
\n\t  should  be  told  that  by  hearing,\treading\t the
\n\t  writing, they can know about the Government Scheme
\n\t  made\tfor   their  benefit   and  progress.  Every
\n\t  Instructor is\t supposed to  know  about  all\tsuch
\n\t  schemes so that they can guide their students. The
\n\t  Adults  should   get\t the   guidance\t  from\t the
\n\t  instructors as  to how  they can  get\t loans\tfrom
\n\t  various banks\t and cooperative  Societies. In\t the
\n\t  com-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
421<\/span><\/p>\n
\t  ing  year  we\t must  equip  the  instructors\twith
\n\t  training   so\t   that\t  they\t  can\tfulfil\t the
\n\t  responsibility given to them.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       In a  meeting held  at Karnal  you were\ttold
\n\t  about the facilities being given to widows and old
\n\t  persons. You have to properly propagate the same.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       I  will\t be  very   grateful  to   you\t for
\n\t  circulating this letter to all the instructors and
\n\t  supervisors.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       Office Dist.  Adult Education officer Karnal.
\n\t  Page No. A-d-4\/3480-659, Karnal dated 13.3.1981.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       One copy\t of the\t letter to  be circulated to
\n\t  all  instructors  and\t supervisors  of  Adult\t and
\n\t  Informal Education for necessary action.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       Dist   Adult    Education   officer    Karnal\n\t  13.2.1987.\"\n<\/pre>\n
The aforesaid  duties which  are required to be performed by
\nthe instructors\t are in addition to their four hour teaching
\nduty. Further  the  instructors\t are  required\tto  organise
\nsports\tlike   kho-kho,\t kabadi\t  and  athletics,   and\t  to
\nparticipate in\tthe local functions and to motivate affluent
\nvillagers to  give donations for the adult education scheme.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This is\t evident  from\ta  circular  letter  issued  by\t the
\nDistrict  Adult\t Education  officer,  Ambala  on  12.11.1986
\n(Annexure to the affidavit of Rajender Singh). Having regard
\nto these  facts and  circumstances we  are of  the view that
\nthere is  no difference\t in the\t nature\t of  duties  of\t the
\ninstructors and\t squad teachers\t and both  of them carry out
\nsimilar work  under the same employer. The doctrine of equal
\nwork equal  pay would  apply on the premise of similar work,
\nbut it\tdoes not mean that there should be complete identity
\nin all\trespects. If  the two  class of persons do same work
\nunder the  same employer, with similar responsibility. under
\nsimilar working conditions the doctrine of ‘equal work equal
\npay’ would  apply and  it would\t not be open to the State to
\ndiscriminate one  class with the other in paying salary. The
\nState is  under a  Constitutional obligation  to ensure that
\nequal pay is paid for equal work.\n<\/p>\n
     The respondents’  contention that\tthe adult  education
\nscheme is  temporary, as the posts are sanctioned on year to
\nyear basis  and as  such the instructors are not entitled to
\nclaim equality\twith the  squad teachers as the scheme under
\nwhich they  work of a permanent nature is misconceived. This
\ncontention was rejected by this Court in the case
\n422<\/span>
\nof Bhagwan  Dass  (supra)  while  considering  the  case  of
\nsupervisors. A\tThere is no doubt that instructors and squad
\nteachers are  employees of  the same  employer doing work of
\nsimilar\t nature\t  in  the   same  department  therefore\t the
\nappointment on\ta temporary  basis or  on regular basis does
\nnot affect the doctrine of equal pay for equal work. Article
\n39(d) contained\t in Part  IV of the Constitution ordains the
\nState to  direct its  policy towards  securing equal pay for
\nequal work  for both  men and  women. Though  Article 39  is
\nincluded in  the Chapter  of Directive\tPrinciples of  State
\nPolicy, but  it is fundamental in nature. The purpose of the
\nArticle is  to fix  certain social  and economic  goals\t for
\navoiding any discrimination amongst the people doing similar
\nwork in\t matters relating  to pay. The doctrine of equal pay
\nfor equal  work has been implemented by this Court in Ranjit
\nSingh v.  Union of  India &  Ors.,<\/a> [1982]  3 SCR 298; Dhiren
\nChamoli and  ors. v.  State of\tU.P.,[1986] 1  SCC  637\t and
\nSurinder Singh\t& Anr.\tv. Engineer-in-Chief,  CPWD &  Ors.,
\n[1986] 1  SCC 639.  In view  of these  authorities it is too
\nlate in\t the day  to disregard the doctrine of equal pay for
\nequal work  on the  ground of the employment being temporary
\nand the\t other being  permanent in  nature. A  temporary  or
\ncasual employee\t performing the same duties and functions is
\nentitled to the same pay as paid to a permanent employee.\n<\/p>\n
     The  respondents’\t contention   that   the   mode\t  of
\nrecruitment of\tpetitioners is\tdifferent from\tthe mode  of
\nrecruitment of\tsquad teachers\tinasmuch as  the petitioners
\nare appointed  locally while squad teachers were selected by
\nthe subordinate Service Selection Board after competing with
\ncandidates from\t any part  of the country. Emphasis was laid
\nduring argument that if a regular selection was held many of
\nthe petitioners\t may not  have been  appointed they  got the
\nemployment  because   outsiders\t did  not  compete.  In\t our
\nopinion,  this\tsubmission  has\t no  merit.  Admittedly\t the
\npetitioners  were  appointed  on  the  recommendation  of  a
\nSelection  Committee   appointed  by   the  Adult  Education
\nDepartment. It\tis true\t that the  petitioners belong to the
\nlocality  where\t  they\thave  been  posted,  but  they\twere
\nappointed only after selection, true that they have not been
\nappointed after\t selection made\t by the\t Subordinate Service
\nSelection Board but that is hardly relevant for the purposes
\nof application\tof doctrine  of “equal\tpay for equal work”.
\nThe difference\tin mode\t of selection  will not\t affect\t the
\napplication of the doctrine of “equal pay for equal work” if
\nboth the  class of  persons perform  similar  functions\t and
\nduties under  the same\temployer. Similar plea raised by the
\nState of  Haryana in opposing the case of supervisors in the
\ncase of\t Bhagwan Dass  (supra) was  rejected, where  it\t was
\nobserved that if the State deliberately chose
\n423<\/span>
\nto limit the selection of candidates from a cluster of a few
\nvillages it  will not  absolve the  State for  treating such
\ncandidates in a discriminatory manner to the disadvantage of
\nthe selectees once they are appointed provided the work done
\nby the\tcandidates so  selected is  similar in\tnature.\t The
\nrecruitment  was   confined  to\t  the  locality\t as  it\t was
\nconsidered advantageous to make recruitment from the cluster
\nof villages  for the  purposes\tof  implementing  the  Adult
\nEducation Scheme because the instructors appointed from that
\narea would  know the people of that area more intimately and
\nwould be  in a\tbetter position\t to persuade  them  to\ttake
\nadvantage of  the Adult Education Scheme in order to make it
\na success.\n<\/p>\n
     The  respondents’\t plea  that   instructors  are\t not
\ntransferable does  not affect  the doctrine of equal pay for
\nequal  work.   The  instructors\t are  appointed\t locally  to
\nimplement the  Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme because
\nthey are  in a\tbetter position\t to motivate  the adults and
\ndrop-outs children  for\t participating\tin  the\t scheme.  An
\noutsider  may\tbe  handicapped\t  in  motivating  the  local
\nresidents for  participating in\t the scheme.  As regards the
\ndifference in qualification is concerned it is true that the
\nsquad teachers possess JBT certificates and many of them are
\ngraduates but  minimum qualification  for squad\t teachers is
\nalso matric. Similarly minimum qualification for instructors
\nis matric but many of the petitioners are graduates and some
\nof them\t are trained  teachers possessing  JBT certificates.
\nGreat emphasis\twas laid  on behalf  of the respondent State
\nthat  instructors   are\t part-time   employees\twhile  squad
\nteachers are  full time\t employees. Similar  arguments\twere
\nraised on  behalf of  the State\t in the case of Bhagwan Dass
\n(supra)\t in  resisting\tthe  claim  of\tsupervisor  but\t the
\nsubmission was\trejected by  this Court\t on the\t ground that
\nhaving\tregard\t to  the  duties  and  functions  which\t the
\nsupervisors are\t required to  perform it  was  difficult  to
\nuphold the  plea that  he was  a part-time  employee. In the
\ninstant cases  also we\thave already  noticed the details of
\nthe duties  and functions  assigned to\tan instructor  which
\nnormally say  that the\tpetitioners are required to teach at
\nthe centre  for four  hours and in addition to that they are
\nrequired to  motivate adults  and drop-outs  children of the
\nlocality and  to prepare survey reports, in addition to that
\nthey are  further  required  to\t implement  various  schemes
\ninitiated by  the Government,  they are\t further required to
\norganise sports,  athletics programme  and to persuade local
\naffluent people\t for making  donations. They are required to
\neducate the  local residents  with  regard  to\tthe  various
\nwelfare schemes\t initiated by the Government for the welfare
\nof the\tresidents of the rural areas. Having regard to their
\nduties\tand   functions\t it   is  difficult  to\t uphold\t the
\nrespondent’s plea that the instructors are
\n424<\/span>
\npart time employees as they work only for four hours.\n<\/p>\n
     In view  of the  above discussion,\t we  hold  that\t the
\ninstructors are entitled to the same pay scale as sanctioned
\nto  squad   teachers.  We,   accordingly,  direct  that\t the
\npetitioners’ salary  shall be fixed in the same pay scale as
\nthat of\t squad teachers.  The pay of each of the petitioners
\nshall be  fixed having\tregard to the length of service with
\neffect from  the date of his initial appointment by ignoring
\nthe  break  in\tservice\t on  account  of  six  months  fresh
\nappointments. The petitioners will be entitled to increments
\nin the\tpay scale in accordance with law notwithstanding the
\nbreak in  service that\tmight have  taken place.  We further
\ndirect that  these  directions\tshall  be  implemented\twith
\neffect from  September 1,  1985 as directed by this Court in
\nthe case  of Bhagwan Das (supra). The petitioners’ claim for
\nregularising their  services In\t the  department  cannot  be
\naccepted as  admittedlly the project of Adult and Non-formal
\nEducation is temporary which is likely to last till 1990. We
\naccordingly allow the writ petitions partly with costs which
\nwe quantify at Rs.5,000.\n<\/p>\n
R.S.S.\t  Petitions allowed.\n<\/p>\n
425<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 Equivalent citations: 1988 AIR 1504, 1988 SCR Supl. (1) 411 Author: K Singh Bench: Singh, K.N. (J) PETITIONER: JAIPAL & OTHERS Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS DATE OF JUDGMENT02\/06\/1988 BENCH: SINGH, K.N. (J) BENCH: SINGH, K.N. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-123103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nJaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"26 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988\",\"datePublished\":\"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\"},\"wordCount\":3746,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\",\"name\":\"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"26 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988","datePublished":"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988"},"wordCount":3746,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988","name":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1988-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-22T08:18:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaipal-others-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-2-june-1988#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jaipal & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 2 June, 1988"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=123103"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123103\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=123103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=123103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=123103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}