New Delhi: The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of review petitions against its August 22, 2025, judgment directing the Gujarat government to grant minimum pay scale benefits to contractual assistant professors working in government engineering and polytechnic colleges.
A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said that there was “no error apparent on the face of the record” warranting interference with the verdict.
“Having perused the review petitions, we find that there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013 has been established,” the Justice Narasimha-led Bench said in its order passed on May 4.
While disposing of contempt petitions arising out of the matter, the apex court recorded the statement made by senior advocate Balbir Singh that the August 2025 judgment would be implemented “in letter and spirit” for 18 employees belonging to the Shah Samir batch and 391 employees belonging to the V.C. Gohel batch.
It further recorded that arrears would be paid with interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum.
“With these directions, the contempt petitions are disposed of,” the bench ordered.
In its August 2025 judgment, the Supreme Court had upheld the principle of “equal pay for equal work” and directed that contractual assistant professors in Gujarat government engineering colleges be paid the minimum pay scale admissible to regular assistant professors.
The apex court had sharply criticised the state government over the treatment meted out to teachers working on contractual appointments for years on meagre salaries.
“Academicians, lecturers and professors are the intellectual backbone of any nation, as they dedicate their lives to shaping the minds and character of future generations,” the judgment had said.
“It is just not enough to keep reciting ‘Gurubramha Gururvishnu Gurdevo Maheshwarah’ at public functions. If we believe in this declaration, it must be reflected in the way the nation treats its teachers,” the bench had observed.
The top court expressed concern that several contractual assistant professors continued to draw a monthly salary of merely Rs 30,000 despite performing duties identical to those of regular and ad hoc faculty members.
“It is disturbing that assistant professors are getting monthly emoluments of Rs 30,000. It is high time that the state takes up the issue and rationalises the pay structure on the basis of the functions that they perform,” it had remarked.
The judgment had also observed that there was “no material whatsoever drawing out a distinction between the duties and functions performed by them and that of their colleagues appointed regularly or on an ad hoc basis”.
Allowing the appeals in part, the Supreme Court had directed that contractual assistant professors be granted the minimum pay scale admissible to assistant professors, along with arrears carrying 8 per cent interest from three years preceding the filing of the writ petitions. Before the apex court, the petitioners, contractual assistant professors, were represented by counsel Dr Alakh Alok Srivastava.
(IANS)
