{"id":33210,"date":"2026-09-30T01:46:46","date_gmt":"2026-09-30T01:46:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=33210"},"modified":"2026-09-30T01:49:24","modified_gmt":"2026-09-30T01:49:24","slug":"equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1 id=\"equal-pay-for-equal-work-india\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Equal_Pay_for_Equal_Work_in_India_Constitutional_Statutory_and_Judicial_Framework\"><\/span>Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Constitutional, Statutory and Judicial Framework<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h1>\n<section id=\"abstract\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Abstract\"><\/span>Abstract<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The principle of \u201cequal pay for equal work\u201d occupies an important position in Indian labour and constitutional law. It expresses the proposition that workers performing the same work, or work of comparable nature, should not receive unequal remuneration merely because of gender, contractual status, nomenclature, or an arbitrary classification. The principle has developed through a combination of constitutional values, statutory regulation, and judicial interpretation. Article 39(d) of the Constitution directs the State to secure equal pay for equal work for both men and women, while Article 14, Article 16 and Article 21 have supplied constitutional foundations for equality, non-arbitrariness and dignity in employment. The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, beginning prominently with <em>Randhir Singh v. Union of India<\/em>, has treated the principle as more than a purely aspirational directive in appropriate cases. At the same time, the Court has repeatedly clarified that the principle does not mean that every employee with the same designation is automatically entitled to identical pay. Actual duties, responsibilities, qualifications, recruitment, skill, experience, accountability and the quality and quantity of work remain relevant.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_88 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Equal_Pay_for_Equal_Work_in_India_Constitutional_Statutory_and_Judicial_Framework\" >Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Constitutional, Statutory and Judicial Framework<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-2' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Abstract\" >Abstract<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#1_Objectives_and_Research_Questions\" >1. Objectives and Research Questions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#2_Research_Methodology\" >2. Research Methodology<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#3_Constitutional_Foundations\" >3. Constitutional Foundations<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#31_Article_14_and_Equality_Before_Law\" >3.1 Article 14 and Equality Before Law<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#32_Article_16_and_Equality_in_Public_Employment\" >3.2 Article 16 and Equality in Public Employment<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#33_Article_39d\" >3.3 Article 39(d)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#34_Article_21_and_Dignity_of_Work\" >3.4 Article 21 and Dignity of Work<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#4_Historical_Development_of_Equal_Pay_Law_in_India\" >4. Historical Development of Equal Pay Law in India<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#5_The_Code_on_Wages_2019\" >5. The Code on Wages, 2019<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#51_Section_3_Prohibition_of_Gender_Discrimination\" >5.1 Section 3: Prohibition of Gender Discrimination<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#52_Same_Work_and_Work_of_Similar_Nature\" >5.2 Same Work and Work of Similar Nature<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#53_No_Reduction_of_Wages\" >5.3 No Reduction of Wages<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#54_Recruitment_Discrimination\" >5.4 Recruitment Discrimination<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#6_Judicial_Development\" >6. Judicial Development<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#61_Randhir_Singh_v_Union_of_India\" >6.1 Randhir Singh v. Union of India<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#62_Dhirendra_Chamoli_v_State_of_UP\" >6.2 Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-20\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#63_Surinder_Singh_v_Engineer-in-Chief_CPWD\" >6.3 Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-21\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#64_State_of_Punjab_v_Jagjit_Singh\" >6.4 State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-22\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#7_What_Counts_as_%E2%80%9CEqual_Work%E2%80%9D\" >7. What Counts as \u201cEqual Work\u201d?<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-23\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#71_Nature_of_Duties\" >7.1 Nature of Duties<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-24\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#72_Skill_and_Qualification\" >7.2 Skill and Qualification<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-25\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#73_Responsibility\" >7.3 Responsibility<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-26\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#74_Working_Conditions\" >7.4 Working Conditions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-27\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#75_Quality_and_Quantity_of_Work\" >7.5 Quality and Quantity of Work<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-28\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#76_Recruitment_and_Selection_Process\" >7.6 Recruitment and Selection Process<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-29\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#8_Gender_Equality_and_the_Pay_Gap\" >8. Gender Equality and the Pay Gap<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-30\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#9_Equal_Pay_in_Public_and_Private_Employment\" >9. Equal Pay in Public and Private Employment<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-31\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#10_Equal_Pay_and_Minimum_Wages_A_Critical_Distinction\" >10. Equal Pay and Minimum Wages: A Critical Distinction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-32\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#11_International_and_Comparative_Perspective\" >11. International and Comparative Perspective<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-33\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#12_Emerging_Challenges\" >12. Emerging Challenges<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-34\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#121_Platform_and_Digital_Work\" >12.1 Platform and Digital Work<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-35\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#122_Artificial_Intelligence_and_Automated_Pay_Decisions\" >12.2 Artificial Intelligence and Automated Pay Decisions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-36\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#123_Remote_Work\" >12.3 Remote Work<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-37\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#124_Performance_Pay\" >12.4 Performance Pay<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-38\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#13_Recommendations\" >13. Recommendations<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-39\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#14_Conclusion\" >14. Conclusion<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-40\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#References\" >References<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-41\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Primary_Sources\" >Primary Sources<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-42\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Cases\" >Cases<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-43\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Government_and_Institutional_Sources\" >Government and Institutional Sources<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-44\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Note_on_Current_Law\" >Note on Current Law<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-45\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#A_Equality_Is_Not_Identity\" >A. Equality Is Not Identity<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-46\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#B_Substantive_Equality\" >B. Substantive Equality<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-47\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#C_Economic_Rationale\" >C. Economic Rationale<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-48\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#D_Institutional_Enforcement\" >D. Institutional Enforcement<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-49\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#E_Contract_Labour_and_Comparators\" >E. Contract Labour and Comparators<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-50\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#F_Gender-Neutral_Enforcement_and_Womens_Economic_Participation\" >F. Gender-Neutral Enforcement and Women&#8217;s Economic Participation<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-51\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#G_The_Future_of_Pay_Equity\" >G. The Future of Pay Equity<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-52\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#Additional_References\" >Additional References<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n<p>The statutory framework has also changed substantially. The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, which specifically prohibited gender discrimination in wages and recruitment, has been subsumed into the Code on Wages, 2019. The Code on Wages prohibits discrimination on the ground of gender in matters relating to wages for the same work or work of a similar nature and also prohibits sex-based discrimination in recruitment for the same or similar work, subject to statutory exceptions. The four labour codes were brought into force from 21 November 2025, making the Code on Wages the current central legislative framework for this subject. The transition creates both opportunities and interpretative challenges because the modern statutory language has to be understood alongside decades of constitutional case law.<\/p>\n<p>This article critically analyses the legal foundations, statutory framework, judicial development, evidentiary requirements, contractual and gender dimensions, public and private employment contexts, and practical limitations of equal-pay doctrine in India. It argues that the central challenge is no longer merely recognition of the principle, but the accurate identification of comparable work and the effective enforcement of rights. Formal equality may coexist with substantial pay inequality where differences are created through job classification, allowances, contractual arrangements, occupational segregation, or unequal access to promotion. A meaningful legal approach therefore requires transparent job evaluation, reliable wage records, accessible dispute-resolution mechanisms, reasoned adjudication, and careful separation of legitimate pay differentiation from discriminatory or arbitrary differentiation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Keywords:<\/strong> equal pay for equal work; equal remuneration; Code on Wages, 2019; Article 14; Article 39(d); gender equality; labour law; wage discrimination; temporary employees; constitutional equality.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"introduction\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Remuneration is one of the most important conditions of employment because wages determine not only immediate livelihood but also economic security, bargaining power and social dignity. A worker who performs substantially the same work as another worker but receives lower remuneration faces a form of inequality that can affect household welfare, professional status and the perceived value of the work itself. For this reason, the idea of equal pay for equal work has become a significant principle in modern labour law.<\/p>\n<p>In India, the principle has a distinctive constitutional history. The Constitution does not place the phrase \u201cequal pay for equal work\u201d in the catalogue of Fundamental Rights. Instead, Article 39(d), contained in the Directive Principles of State Policy, directs the State to secure equal pay for both men and women for equal work. Yet the Supreme Court has not treated the principle as legally irrelevant merely because it appears in Part IV. Through Article 14 and related constitutional guarantees, the Court has developed a doctrine against arbitrary pay differentiation in appropriate employment contexts. This development illustrates the broader constitutional method by which Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights are read together to advance substantive equality.<\/p>\n<p>The statutory position has also evolved. The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 was enacted specifically to implement the constitutional commitment to equal remuneration between men and women and to prevent discrimination in recruitment and service conditions. The Code on Wages, 2019 later subsumed the Equal Remuneration Act along with the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. Section 3 of the Code establishes a prohibition on gender discrimination in wages for the same work or work of a similar nature and restricts sex discrimination in recruitment. Section 4 provides a mechanism for disputes about whether work is the same or of a similar nature.<\/p>\n<p>The current legal position must therefore be understood through two interconnected streams. The first is constitutional and judicial: the principle of non-arbitrariness and equal treatment in employment. The second is statutory: the specific prohibition contained in the Code on Wages. These streams overlap but are not identical. A statutory claim may focus on gender discrimination, whereas constitutional equal-pay litigation may involve temporary and permanent employees, public employment, contractual status or other classifications. The legal test in a particular case depends on the source of the right, the employer, the nature of the work and the evidence.<\/p>\n<p>A critical analysis is particularly important because \u201cequal work\u201d is not a self-defining expression. Two employees may have the same designation but different responsibilities. Conversely, two employees with different designations may perform substantially similar duties. Pay may also differ because of seniority, qualifications, specialised skills, higher responsibility, geographic hardship, risk, recruitment standards or a legitimate career structure. The law must therefore distinguish discrimination from rational differentiation.<\/p>\n<p>The problem becomes even more complex in contemporary labour markets. Employers increasingly use fixed-term employment, outsourcing, contract labour, platform arrangements, performance-linked incentives and differentiated allowances. Women and men may enter the same organisation but be concentrated in different occupations or grades. A narrow focus on basic salary can conceal inequalities in bonuses, allowances, overtime opportunities, promotion, job security and access to higher-paying assignments. Thus, the equal-pay principle cannot be understood only as a simple comparison of two monthly salaries.<\/p>\n<p>This article adopts a doctrinal and analytical approach. It examines constitutional provisions, the Code on Wages, 2019, the historical Equal Remuneration Act, and leading Supreme Court decisions. It also considers the evidentiary and institutional difficulties involved in applying the principle. The objective is not to assume that every pay difference is unlawful, but to identify the legal reasoning required to determine when a difference is justified and when it is inconsistent with equality.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"objectives-and-research-questions\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"1_Objectives_and_Research_Questions\"><\/span>1. Objectives and Research Questions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The principal objectives of this article are:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>To explain the constitutional and statutory foundations of equal pay for equal work in India.<\/li>\n<li>To examine the transition from the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 to the Code on Wages, 2019.<\/li>\n<li>To analyse the Supreme Court\u2019s development of the doctrine through leading cases.<\/li>\n<li>To clarify how courts determine whether two categories of work are equal or comparable.<\/li>\n<li>To examine the relevance of gender, contractual status, temporary employment and public employment.<\/li>\n<li>To identify practical evidentiary and enforcement barriers.<\/li>\n<li>To critically assess whether the present framework can address contemporary forms of wage inequality.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"research-methodology\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"2_Research_Methodology\"><\/span>2. Research Methodology<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>This article uses a doctrinal legal research methodology. Primary materials include the Constitution of India, the Code on Wages, 2019, the former Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, and decisions of the Supreme Court of India. Secondary materials include government publications, legal scholarship and analytical commentary on labour equality.<\/p>\n<p>The research is primarily qualitative. It does not attempt to calculate the gender pay gap across all sectors or conduct an empirical survey of employers. Instead, it examines legal rules and their practical implications. The analysis distinguishes between three different ideas that are sometimes treated as interchangeable: equality of remuneration for equal or similar work; minimum wage protection; and the broader economic concept of the gender pay gap. These concepts overlap but are legally distinct. Equal-pay law asks whether workers performing comparable work have been treated differently without a legally sufficient basis. A pay-gap statistic may reveal a structural pattern but does not, by itself, prove that a particular employer has violated equal-pay law.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"constitutional-foundations\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"3_Constitutional_Foundations\"><\/span>3. Constitutional Foundations<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"article-14-equality-before-law\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"31_Article_14_and_Equality_Before_Law\"><\/span>3.1 Article 14 and Equality Before Law<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. In employment matters, it has been used to control arbitrary classification and unequal treatment. Equal pay litigation under Article 14 generally requires attention to whether employees who are claimed to be similarly situated are in fact comparable in relevant respects.<\/p>\n<p>The constitutional equality principle does not require the State to make every employee\u2019s remuneration identical. Classification is constitutionally permissible when it rests on an intelligible differentia and bears a rational relation to the objective sought. Therefore, a difference in pay can be valid if it is based on relevant factors such as higher responsibility, specialised qualifications or materially different duties. The difficulty arises when the stated classification is merely a label concealing substantial similarity.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Constitution of India 1950, art 14.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"article-16-public-employment\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"32_Article_16_and_Equality_in_Public_Employment\"><\/span>3.2 Article 16 and Equality in Public Employment<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Because many leading equal-pay cases involve government departments, public corporations or statutory bodies, Article 16 often forms part of the constitutional context. It reinforces the requirement that public employers cannot create arbitrary employment classifications.<\/p>\n<p>However, Article 16 does not automatically convert every contractual or temporary employee into a regular employee. Recruitment method, qualifications, sanctioned posts, selection procedures and service conditions may legitimately differ. The critical question is whether the claimed pay difference is based on a relevant distinction or merely on formal status where the actual work and responsibility are substantially the same.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"article-39d-equal-pay\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"33_Article_39d\"><\/span>3.3 Article 39(d)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Article 39(d) expressly directs the State to secure equal pay for equal work for both men and women. As a Directive Principle, it is not directly enforceable in the same manner as a Fundamental Right. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has repeatedly relied upon it as an important constitutional value when interpreting equality in employment.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of Article 39(d) is twofold. First, it gives constitutional recognition to the economic dimension of equality. Secondly, it demonstrates that gender equality is not limited to formal non-discrimination. If women are paid less for work that is genuinely equal or similar, the constitutional commitment to equality in economic life is weakened.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"article-21-dignity-of-work\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"34_Article_21_and_Dignity_of_Work\"><\/span>3.4 Article 21 and Dignity of Work<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Article 21 protects life and personal liberty, and constitutional jurisprudence has expanded its meaning to include dignity and conditions necessary for a meaningful life. Wage equality is not automatically a separate Article 21 right in every employment dispute, but fair remuneration can be understood within the wider constitutional concern for dignity, livelihood and protection from arbitrary state action.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"historical-development\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"4_Historical_Development_of_Equal_Pay_Law_in_India\"><\/span>4. Historical Development of Equal Pay Law in India<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Before the Equal Remuneration Act, wage discrimination was addressed through a combination of constitutional principles, labour legislation and judicial reasoning. The absence of a single comprehensive statutory framework created practical difficulties, particularly for women workers.<\/p>\n<p>The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 represented a major legislative step. It prohibited discrimination in remuneration between men and women workers for the same work or work of a similar nature. It also addressed discrimination in recruitment. The Act required employers to maintain relevant records and created authorities for deciding disputes. The Ministry of Labour historically described its implementation as involving inspection of employment records and adjudication of claims concerning equal rates of wages for men and women workers.<\/p>\n<p>The Act was important because it converted a constitutional aspiration into specific statutory obligations. It also recognised that wage discrimination can occur before employment begins, through discriminatory recruitment practices, rather than only after an employee joins an establishment.<\/p>\n<p>However, the Act had a limited conceptual scope because it was principally concerned with gender. Equal-pay disputes in India also arose from distinctions between regular and temporary employees, daily wagers and permanent staff, contractual and regular workers, and employees performing comparable work under different institutional arrangements. Those disputes were often litigated primarily under constitutional equality rather than the Equal Remuneration Act.<\/p>\n<p>The Code on Wages, 2019 subsumed the Equal Remuneration Act. Section 69 of the Code repeals the earlier statute, while Section 3 carries forward the core prohibition in a consolidated wage-law framework. The Ministry of Labour states that the Code amalgamates four wage-related laws and prohibits gender discrimination in wages and recruitment for the same work or work of similar nature.<\/p>\n<p>The four labour codes, including the Code on Wages, came into force on 21 November 2025 according to the Ministry of Labour and Employment. Consequently, contemporary analysis should treat the Code on Wages as the current central statutory framework, while using the Equal Remuneration Act mainly for historical understanding and interpretation.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Equal Remuneration Act 1976; Constitution of India 1950, art 39(d).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"code-on-wages-2019\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"5_The_Code_on_Wages_2019\"><\/span>5. The Code on Wages, 2019<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p><em>Citation: Code on Wages 2019, ss 3 and 4.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section-3-gender-discrimination\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"51_Section_3_Prohibition_of_Gender_Discrimination\"><\/span>5.1 Section 3: Prohibition of Gender Discrimination<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Section 3 of the Code provides that there shall be no discrimination in an establishment or any unit among employees on the ground of gender in matters relating to wages by the same employer in respect of the same work or work of a similar nature. It also prohibits an employer from reducing wages merely to comply with the equality requirement.<\/p>\n<p>The provision is significant because it combines the principle of equal remuneration with a prohibition on sex discrimination in recruitment for the same or similar work, subject to circumstances in which employment of women is prohibited or restricted by law. This means that the law addresses both entry into employment and remuneration after employment begins.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Mackinnon Mackenzie &amp; Co Ltd v Audrey D\u2019Costa (1987) 2 SCC 469; ILO Convention No. 100.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"same-work-similar-nature\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"52_Same_Work_and_Work_of_Similar_Nature\"><\/span>5.2 Same Work and Work of Similar Nature<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The statutory phrase \u201csame work or work of a similar nature\u201d is central. The law does not require two jobs to be literally identical. At the same time, the expression cannot be so broad that all employees in an organisation become comparable.<\/p>\n<p>The Code contemplates a dispute-resolution mechanism for determining whether work is the same or similar. This is important because job titles are not decisive. The analysis should focus on the actual nature of duties and the relevant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"no-reduction-of-wages\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"53_No_Reduction_of_Wages\"><\/span>5.3 No Reduction of Wages<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Code expressly prevents an employer from reducing an employee\u2019s wage merely to comply with the equal-pay rule. This protects equality from becoming a mechanism for levelling down. If one employee is underpaid relative to a comparator, the solution should ordinarily be to address the unlawful inequality rather than reduce the comparator\u2019s lawful remuneration.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"recruitment-discrimination\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"54_Recruitment_Discrimination\"><\/span>5.4 Recruitment Discrimination<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The recruitment prohibition is particularly important for gender equality. Wage equality can be undermined at the hiring stage if women are offered lower starting pay for the same work, excluded from particular jobs without a lawful basis, or placed into lower-paid categories despite performing equivalent functions.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"judicial-development\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"6_Judicial_Development\"><\/span>6. Judicial Development<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"randhir-singh\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"61_Randhir_Singh_v_Union_of_India\"><\/span>6.1 <em>Randhir Singh v. Union of India<\/em><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><em>Randhir Singh v. Union of India<\/em> is a foundational decision in the development of equal-pay jurisprudence. The Supreme Court recognised that equal pay for equal work is a constitutional goal reflected in Article 39(d) and capable of being read with the equality guarantee under Article 14. The case involved a government driver who claimed parity with drivers performing comparable functions.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of <em>Randhir Singh<\/em> lies not simply in its outcome but in its constitutional method. The Court treated the Directive Principle as relevant to interpreting the enforceable equality guarantee. The decision established the basic proposition that the State cannot arbitrarily differentiate in pay between employees performing substantially the same work merely because of an artificial classification.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, the principle was never intended to operate as an automatic formula. The Court recognised that classification based on relevant differences may justify different pay scales. Thus, <em>Randhir Singh<\/em> should be read as a protection against arbitrary pay differentiation, not as a rule of identical remuneration in every employment relationship.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Randhir Singh v Union of India (1982) 1 SCC 618.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"dhirendra-chamoli\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"62_Dhirendra_Chamoli_v_State_of_UP\"><\/span>6.2 <em>Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P.<\/em><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>In <em>Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P.<\/em>, workers engaged on a temporary basis sought parity with regular employees performing similar work. The Supreme Court emphasised that the State should not exploit the temporary character of employment to deny workers the benefit of equal remuneration where the underlying work is substantially the same.<\/p>\n<p>The case contributed to the development of the principle beyond gender. It demonstrated that contractual or temporary labels cannot, by themselves, settle the equal-pay question. The actual duties and the nature of the work remain central.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Dhirendra Chamoli v State of Uttar Pradesh (1986) 1 SCC 637.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"surinder-singh\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"63_Surinder_Singh_v_Engineer-in-Chief_CPWD\"><\/span>6.3 <em>Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD<\/em><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><em>Surinder Singh<\/em> involved daily-rated workers and the question of parity with regular employees. The Court continued the approach that where employees perform the same duties and bear substantially similar responsibilities, an unjustified pay distinction may violate constitutional equality.<\/p>\n<p>The case is important because it shows the tension between formal employment categories and substantive work. Government establishments may classify employees by mode of recruitment, but the classification cannot be treated as conclusive if the actual work is materially identical.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Surinder Singh v Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD (1986) 1 SCC 639.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"state-of-punjab-jagjit-singh\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"64_State_of_Punjab_v_Jagjit_Singh\"><\/span>6.4 <em>State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh<\/em><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><em>State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh<\/em> is particularly significant for temporary employees. The Supreme Court considered claims by temporary employees who performed duties and responsibilities corresponding to regular employees. The Court reiterated that temporary employees may be entitled to the minimum of the regular pay scale where the actual duties and responsibilities are identical, while also recognising that the doctrine has defined limits.<\/p>\n<p>The decision is frequently misunderstood as creating a universal right for every temporary employee to receive the salary of a regular employee. That is not the correct approach. The Court stressed that the burden of establishing comparability lies on the claimant and that designation alone is insufficient. Differences in qualifications, responsibilities, confidentiality, reliability, hierarchy, quality or volume of work can justify different treatment.<\/p>\n<p><em>Jagjit Singh<\/em> therefore illustrates both sides of the doctrine: it prevents arbitrary exploitation of temporary status, but it does not abolish legitimate job classification.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: State of Punjab v Jagjit Singh (2017) 1 SCC 148.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"what-counts-as-equal-work\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"7_What_Counts_as_%E2%80%9CEqual_Work%E2%80%9D\"><\/span>7. What Counts as \u201cEqual Work\u201d?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The hardest legal question is often not whether equality is desirable but whether two jobs are sufficiently comparable.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Randhir Singh v Union of India (1982) 1 SCC 618; Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers v Union of India (1988) 3 SCC 91.<\/em><\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Factor<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Legal Relevance<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Nature of duties<\/td>\n<td>Courts examine actual functions rather than relying solely on job designations.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Skill and qualification<\/td>\n<td>Relevant education, technical skill and specialised training may justify differences where they materially affect the work.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Responsibility<\/td>\n<td>Supervision, confidential information, expensive equipment, independent decisions and legal or financial accountability may justify higher remuneration.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Working conditions<\/td>\n<td>Hazardous environments, difficult locations and unusual hours may justify allowances or different remuneration.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Quality and quantity of work<\/td>\n<td>Genuine performance-based distinctions may be legitimate where standards are transparent and consistently applied.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Recruitment and selection process<\/td>\n<td>Recruitment procedures can be relevant, but recruitment method cannot automatically justify an indefinite pay disparity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<h3 id=\"nature-of-duties\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"71_Nature_of_Duties\"><\/span>7.1 Nature of Duties<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The first factor is the nature of duties. Courts examine what employees actually do rather than relying solely on designations. Two employees may have different titles but perform substantially the same tasks. Conversely, identical titles may conceal different functions.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"skill-and-qualification\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"72_Skill_and_Qualification\"><\/span>7.2 Skill and Qualification<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Education, technical skill and specialised training may justify differences where they materially affect the work. However, qualification differences should not be used mechanically. If an employee does not use a particular qualification in the actual job, the relevance of that qualification to remuneration may require examination.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"responsibility\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"73_Responsibility\"><\/span>7.3 Responsibility<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Responsibility is a major factor. An employee who supervises staff, controls sensitive information, handles expensive equipment, makes independent decisions or bears legal or financial accountability may legitimately receive higher pay than an employee performing routine tasks.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"working-conditions\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"74_Working_Conditions\"><\/span>7.4 Working Conditions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Hazardous environments, difficult locations, unusual hours and other working conditions may justify allowances or different remuneration. The distinction must, however, correspond to actual conditions rather than stereotypes.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"quality-quantity-work\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"75_Quality_and_Quantity_of_Work\"><\/span>7.5 Quality and Quantity of Work<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The jurisprudence recognises that the quality and quantity of work can matter. Employees doing superficially similar tasks may produce materially different levels of output or carry different workloads. A genuine performance-based distinction can therefore be legitimate, although employers should use transparent and consistently applied standards.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"recruitment-selection\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"76_Recruitment_and_Selection_Process\"><\/span>7.6 Recruitment and Selection Process<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Differences in recruitment procedures can be relevant, particularly in public employment. A regular employee recruited through a competitive statutory process may occupy a sanctioned post carrying defined responsibilities. A temporary worker may have entered through a different process. However, recruitment method cannot automatically justify an indefinite pay disparity if the employees subsequently perform substantially the same work. The legal relevance of the distinction depends on the complete employment structure.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"gender-equality-pay-gap\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"8_Gender_Equality_and_the_Pay_Gap\"><\/span>8. Gender Equality and the Pay Gap<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The principle of equal pay is closely connected with gender equality but should not be confused with the broader gender pay gap.<\/p>\n<p>A gender pay gap can arise from occupational segregation, unequal representation in senior positions, career interruptions, differences in working hours, concentration of women in lower-paid occupations, unequal access to overtime or performance opportunities, and other structural factors. An aggregate pay-gap statistic therefore does not establish that every difference is caused by direct wage discrimination.<\/p>\n<p>Equal-pay law addresses a narrower but important question: where employees perform the same work or work of a similar nature, is the wage difference based on gender? Section 3 of the Code on Wages directly addresses this problem.<\/p>\n<p>The recruitment limb is also important because occupational segregation can begin before an employee is paid. If women are systematically excluded from better-paid work without a lawful reason, formal equal pay within lower-paid jobs cannot fully achieve economic equality.<\/p>\n<p>Gender-neutral wording in modern legislation can be beneficial because discrimination may take forms not captured by a simple male-versus-female comparison. Nevertheless, historical inequalities affecting women remain central to the policy purpose of equal remuneration law. Enforcement therefore needs to examine both individual claims and institutional patterns.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Mackinnon Mackenzie &amp; Co Ltd v Audrey D\u2019Costa (1987) 2 SCC 469; ILO Convention No. 100.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"public-private-employment\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"9_Equal_Pay_in_Public_and_Private_Employment\"><\/span>9. Equal Pay in Public and Private Employment<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The constitutional doctrine is strongest where the employer is the State or an instrumentality of the State because Articles 14 and 16 directly regulate state action. Private employment is governed principally by legislation, contracts and applicable labour standards, including the Code on Wages.<\/p>\n<p>This distinction has practical consequences. A public employee may invoke constitutional equality where the necessary conditions are met. A private-sector worker may rely more directly on statutory provisions and the employment relationship.<\/p>\n<p>However, the constitutional value of equality influences statutory interpretation and labour policy more broadly. The Code on Wages applies its gender discrimination prohibition to establishments within its scope, thereby providing statutory protection beyond traditional public employment litigation.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Randhir Singh v Union of India (1982) 1 SCC 618.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"equal-pay-minimum-wages\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"10_Equal_Pay_and_Minimum_Wages_A_Critical_Distinction\"><\/span>10. Equal Pay and Minimum Wages: A Critical Distinction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Minimum wage and equal pay are related but distinct legal protections.<\/p>\n<p>Minimum wage law sets a floor below which remuneration cannot ordinarily fall. Equal-pay law concerns relative treatment among comparable employees. A worker can be paid above the minimum wage and still receive less than a similarly situated comparator because of gender or another unlawful basis.<\/p>\n<p>The distinction is important because an employer may argue that the employee is receiving the legally prescribed minimum wage. That answer does not necessarily address a claim that the employer pays another employee more for the same or similar work without justification.<\/p>\n<p>Conversely, equal pay does not guarantee that every worker performing the same job will receive exactly the same total amount. Seniority, legitimate experience, performance, risk and other lawful factors may affect pay.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Code on Wages 2019, ss 3\u20134; relevant constitutional remedies under arts 32 and 226.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"international-comparative-perspective\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"11_International_and_Comparative_Perspective\"><\/span>11. International and Comparative Perspective<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The idea of equal pay has an international dimension. The International Labour Organization\u2019s Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) promotes equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value. The concept of \u201cequal value\u201d is broader than identical work and encourages objective evaluation of skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions.<\/p>\n<p>The international perspective is useful because it highlights a limitation of purely identical-work comparisons. In many economies, women and men are concentrated in different occupations. If the law compares only identical jobs, it may fail to address inequalities between different occupations that have comparable skill, effort and responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>India\u2019s statutory wording concerning the same work or work of a similar nature provides an important basis for protection, but the broader international idea of work of equal value can inform policy discussions about job evaluation and structural wage inequality. Any incorporation into domestic law, however, must occur through the applicable constitutional and legislative framework.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100); ILO Recommendation No. 90.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"emerging-challenges\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"12_Emerging_Challenges\"><\/span>12. Emerging Challenges<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"platform-digital-work\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"121_Platform_and_Digital_Work\"><\/span>12.1 Platform and Digital Work<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Digital labour platforms create new questions about employment status and remuneration. Workers may be paid through algorithms, incentives and dynamic rates. If two groups perform substantially comparable tasks but receive different rates because of a prohibited ground, conventional equal-pay principles may become relevant, but the legal route may depend on worker classification and the applicable statutory framework.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"artificial-intelligence-pay-decisions\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"122_Artificial_Intelligence_and_Automated_Pay_Decisions\"><\/span>12.2 Artificial Intelligence and Automated Pay Decisions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Automated recruitment and performance systems may influence pay. If an algorithm reproduces historical patterns of discrimination, a formally neutral system may produce unequal outcomes. Employers should therefore maintain audit mechanisms and ensure that remuneration systems can be explained and reviewed.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"remote-work\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"123_Remote_Work\"><\/span>12.3 Remote Work<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Remote work can alter the traditional concept of workplace comparison. Employees may perform similar work from different locations and receive location-based allowances or salaries. Some geographic differences may be legitimate, while others may be difficult to justify. The relevant question remains whether the difference is connected to an objective employment factor recognised by law.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"performance-pay\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"124_Performance_Pay\"><\/span>12.4 Performance Pay<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Performance-based compensation can make equal-pay analysis more complex. The legal system should distinguish legitimate differences based on documented performance from subjective evaluations that disproportionately disadvantage one category of workers.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"recommendations\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"13_Recommendations\"><\/span>13. Recommendations<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li>First, employers should adopt transparent job-evaluation systems. Jobs should be evaluated using consistent criteria such as skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions.<\/li>\n<li>Second, wage structures should be documented. Each grade should have defined responsibilities and a rational salary range.<\/li>\n<li>Third, employers should conduct periodic pay-equity audits. The audits should examine gender, contract status, tenure and job category while accounting for legitimate explanatory variables.<\/li>\n<li>Fourth, workers should have accessible mechanisms to raise wage concerns without retaliation.<\/li>\n<li>Fifth, authorities should issue clear guidance on the practical application of \u201csame work or work of a similar nature.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Sixth, adjudicating authorities should require evidence concerning actual duties rather than relying on job titles.<\/li>\n<li>Seventh, employment records should be maintained electronically in a manner that supports lawful access, confidentiality and accountability.<\/li>\n<li>Eighth, recruitment and promotion decisions should be documented because unequal starting pay can create long-term disparities.<\/li>\n<li>Ninth, gender equality policies should cover allowances, overtime opportunities, bonuses, promotion and training, not merely basic salary.<\/li>\n<li>Tenth, legal education should be improved so that workers and employers understand the difference between equal pay, minimum wages, overtime and other wage rights.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><em>Citation: Code on Wages 2019; ILO Convention No. 100.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"conclusion\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"14_Conclusion\"><\/span>14. Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Equal pay for equal work is a significant principle of Indian labour law because it connects economic justice with constitutional equality. Its development demonstrates how Article 39(d), although located in the Directive Principles, has influenced the interpretation of Articles 14 and 16. The Supreme Court\u2019s jurisprudence has transformed the principle from a broad constitutional aspiration into a practical doctrine capable of addressing arbitrary pay differentiation in appropriate circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 gave the principle a specific statutory form, particularly in relation to gender discrimination. Its repeal and subsumption into the Code on Wages, 2019 represents the next stage of legislative consolidation. Section 3 retains the core protection against gender discrimination in wages for the same work or work of a similar nature and also addresses discriminatory recruitment. The Code on Wages became part of the operational labour-code framework from 21 November 2025, according to official Ministry of Labour and Employment materials.<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary challenge, however, lies in application. Equal pay cannot be reduced to a slogan that every worker with a similar job title must receive identical remuneration. Nor can employers defeat genuine claims by relying on formal labels. The decisive inquiry should be functional and evidence-based. Actual duties, skill, effort, responsibility, working conditions, qualifications, experience and objective performance criteria must be considered.<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine is also limited by the structure of labour markets. Direct wage equality within a job does not automatically remove occupational segregation, unequal promotion opportunities or differences in access to high-paying assignments. Therefore, the legal principle should operate alongside broader measures promoting transparency, non-discriminatory recruitment, fair promotion and objective job evaluation.<\/p>\n<p>The current framework contains important protections but requires effective implementation. Workers need access to relevant information, employers need clear and rational pay systems, and adjudicating authorities need consistent methods for evaluating comparability. The most sustainable approach is not to eliminate every difference in pay, but to require that differences have legitimate, evidence-based and non-discriminatory reasons.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, equal pay for equal work represents a balance between two ideas. The first is equality: workers should not be disadvantaged because of gender or arbitrary classification. The second is rational differentiation: genuine differences in skill, responsibility, experience, working conditions and performance may justify different remuneration. Indian labour law is most coherent when it protects the first without denying the second. The effectiveness of the principle will therefore depend less on repeating the phrase \u201cequal pay for equal work\u201d and more on developing transparent job evaluation, reliable evidence, accessible remedies and consistent adjudication.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Constitution of India 1950, art 39(d); Code on Wages 2019, ss 3\u20134; Supreme Court authorities cited above.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"references\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"References\"><\/span>References<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"primary-sources\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Primary_Sources\"><\/span>Primary Sources<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li>Constitution of India, Articles 14, 15, 16, 21 and 39(d).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Code on Wages, 2019, Act No. 29 of 2019, especially Sections 2, 3, 4 and 69.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Minimum Wages Act, 1948.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Payment of Wages Act, 1936.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>International Labour Organization, Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100).<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h3 id=\"cases\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Cases\"><\/span>Cases<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<ol start=\"8\">\n<li><strong><em>Randhir Singh v. Union of India<\/em>, (1982) 1 SCC 618.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P.<\/em>, (1986) 1 SCC 637.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD<\/em>, (1986) 1 SCC 639.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Mackinnon Mackenzie &amp; Co. Ltd. v. Audrey D\u2019Costa<\/em>, (1987) 2 SCC 469.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers v. Union of India<\/em>, (1988) 3 SCC 91.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh<\/em>, (2017) 1 SCC 148.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><em>Citation: ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100); ILO Recommendation No. 90.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3 id=\"government-institutional-sources\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Government_and_Institutional_Sources\"><\/span>Government and Institutional Sources<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<ol start=\"14\">\n<li><strong>Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, The Code on Wages, 2019.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, official material concerning implementation of the Labour Codes.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, material concerning the former Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Supreme Court of India, judgments and case materials concerning equal pay for equal work.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"note-on-current-law\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Note_on_Current_Law\"><\/span>Note on Current Law<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>This article is prepared as a doctrinal academic research paper and reflects the central statutory position and official materials available for the current legal framework. Before formal submission or use in litigation, the latest text of the Code on Wages, applicable rules, notifications, judicial decisions and the relevant jurisdictional procedure should be checked. The distinction between statutory equal-pay protection and constitutional claims should be maintained in any case-specific analysis.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"equality-is-not-identity\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"A_Equality_Is_Not_Identity\"><\/span>A. Equality Is Not Identity<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>A recurring misunderstanding in equal-pay litigation is the assumption that equality requires identical treatment in every respect. Constitutional equality is concerned with relevant similarity and relevant difference. If two jobs are identical in every material respect, a wage difference based on gender is difficult to justify. But if one employee has a substantially greater supervisory burden, handles confidential information, carries professional liability or performs work requiring specialised expertise, a different pay scale may be rational. The legal problem is therefore one of classification. The classification must correspond to real differences rather than convenient labels. This is why judicial decisions repeatedly insist on looking at the substance of the work. The law is not asking whether two employees look similar on paper; it is asking whether the differences that allegedly justify unequal pay are real, relevant and sufficiently connected to the remuneration structure.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"substantive-equality\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"B_Substantive_Equality\"><\/span>B. Substantive Equality<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The doctrine also illustrates the movement from formal to substantive equality. Formal equality would prohibit an employer from expressly stating that women receive less than men for the same job. Substantive equality asks whether apparently neutral structures produce a discriminatory result because one category of workers is systematically placed in lower grades or denied access to higher-paid opportunities. The Code on Wages directly addresses gender discrimination in wages and recruitment, but broader labour policy must also consider how occupational structures are created. A company may have identical pay for men and women within every grade and still have very few women in senior grades. That fact alone does not establish an equal-pay violation, but it may justify examination of recruitment, promotion and career-development practices. Thus, equal pay is one component of workplace equality rather than the entire field of equality law.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"economic-rationale\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"C_Economic_Rationale\"><\/span>C. Economic Rationale<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Equal remuneration also has an economic rationale. When wages are determined through discriminatory assumptions rather than the value of work, labour markets may allocate workers inefficiently. Employers may underinvest in skills if certain groups receive systematically lower returns. Transparent and objective remuneration can improve trust, retention and the credibility of promotion systems. At the same time, wage differentiation can serve legitimate economic purposes when it reflects scarce skills, difficult working conditions, experience or greater responsibility. The legal objective is therefore not wage uniformity but rational remuneration. A well-designed pay system should make it possible to explain why two employees receive different amounts and to demonstrate that the explanation is related to the job rather than to a prohibited personal characteristic.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"institutional-enforcement\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"D_Institutional_Enforcement\"><\/span>D. Institutional Enforcement<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The practical success of the Code on Wages depends on institutions as much as on statutory language. A worker who suspects wage discrimination needs to know where a complaint can be filed, what evidence is required, whether records can be obtained, how quickly the matter will be decided and what protection exists against retaliation. Employers similarly need predictable standards. If different authorities apply different approaches to comparable cases, uncertainty increases. Consolidation of wage legislation can reduce fragmentation, but only if subordinate rules, administrative guidance and adjudicatory practice are clear. Digital labour administration may assist by improving record-keeping and complaint processing, but technology should supplement rather than replace reasoned legal evaluation.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"contract-labour-comparators\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"E_Contract_Labour_and_Comparators\"><\/span>E. Contract Labour and Comparators<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Contract labour creates a particularly difficult comparator problem. A contract worker may work beside a regular employee, use the same machine and report to the same supervisor, yet receive wages through a contractor. The two workers may therefore appear functionally identical while occupying different legal relationships. An equal-pay claim must identify the statute and the precise employer relationship that it regulates. The existence of a common workplace is relevant but not necessarily decisive. Authorities should examine who recruits, who pays, who controls the work, what duties are performed and whether the statute treats the categories as comparable. The analysis should avoid both automatic parity and automatic rejection. Contractual structure is relevant evidence, but it should not substitute for examination of the actual work.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"gender-neutral-enforcement\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"F_Gender-Neutral_Enforcement_and_Womens_Economic_Participation\"><\/span>F. Gender-Neutral Enforcement and Women&#8217;s Economic Participation<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Gender-neutral enforcement should not obscure the historical purpose of equal remuneration law. Women have traditionally faced occupational segregation, lower participation in certain sectors and barriers to promotion. Equal pay provisions help address one part of that inequality by ensuring that women do not receive lower wages merely because they are women. The recruitment prohibition is equally important because a wage equality rule is incomplete if women are prevented from entering better-paid occupations. Employers should therefore review hiring advertisements, interview criteria, starting salaries and promotion systems. A fair starting salary matters because wage differences established at entry can compound over time through percentage-based increments, bonuses and retirement-linked benefits.<\/p>\n<p><em>Citation: Mackinnon Mackenzie &amp; Co Ltd v Audrey D\u2019Costa (1987) 2 SCC 469; ILO Convention No. 100.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"future-of-pay-equity\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"G_The_Future_of_Pay_Equity\"><\/span>G. The Future of Pay Equity<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The future of pay equity in India will increasingly involve data. Large employers can compare pay across job families and identify unexplained differences. Data, however, must be interpreted carefully. A statistical difference is a signal for investigation, not automatically proof of unlawful discrimination. Legitimate factors such as tenure, performance, location and skill may explain part of the difference. The value of data is therefore diagnostic. It can reveal where a legal or managerial review is needed. Combining data analysis with transparent job descriptions and worker consultation could create a more preventive approach, reducing dependence on individual litigation after inequality has already persisted for years.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"additional-references\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Additional_References\"><\/span>Additional References<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Constitution of India 1950.<\/li>\n<li>Equal Remuneration Act 1976.<\/li>\n<li>Code on Wages 2019.<\/li>\n<li><em>Randhir Singh v Union of India<\/em> (1982) 1 SCC 618.<\/li>\n<li><em>Dhirendra Chamoli v State of Uttar Pradesh<\/em> (1986) 1 SCC 637.<\/li>\n<li><em>Surinder Singh v Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD<\/em> (1986) 1 SCC 639.<\/li>\n<li><em>Mackinnon Mackenzie &amp; Co Ltd v Audrey D\u2019Costa<\/em> (1987) 2 SCC 469.<\/li>\n<li><em>Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers v Union of India<\/em> (1988) 3 SCC 91.<\/li>\n<li><em>State of U.P. v Putti Lal<\/em> (2006) 9 SCC 337.<\/li>\n<li><em>State of Punjab v Jagjit Singh<\/em> (2017) 1 SCC 148.<\/li>\n<li>ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100).<\/li>\n<li>ILO Equal Remuneration Recommendation, 1951 (No. 90).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/the-new-architecture-of-work-evaluating-indias-labour-code-reforms\/\">The New Architecture of Work: Evaluating India\u2019s Labour Code Reforms<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/between-innovation-and-infringement-dpiits-dilemma-on-ai-training-and-copyright\/\">Between Innovation and Infringement: DPIIT\u2019s Dilemma on AI Training and Copyright<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/labour-laws-in-india-labour-codes-employee-rights-2026\/\">Labour Laws in India 2026: New Labour Codes, Employee Rights &amp; Latest Reforms Explained<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/ilo-indian-labour-law-minimum-wages-workers-rights\/\">ILO and Indian Labour Law: Impact on Minimum Wages and Workers\u2019 Rights<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/legal-rights-for-womens-protection-in-india\/\">Legal Rights for Women&#8217;s Protection in India<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Constitutional, Statutory and Judicial Framework Abstract The principle of \u201cequal pay for equal work\u201d occupies an important position in Indian labour and constitutional law. It expresses the proposition that workers performing the same work, or work of comparable nature, should not receive unequal remuneration merely because of gender,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1848,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[4766],"tags":[774],"class_list":["post-33210","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-labour-law","tag-labour-law"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v28.4 (Yoast SEO v28.6) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.\" \/>\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.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Riya Malkani\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Riya Malkani\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"28 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Riya Malkani\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d0c3867f3f4c9e624a23ce61eb908b33\"},\"headline\":\"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":6129,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Labour Law\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Labour Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/\",\"name\":\"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00\",\"description\":\"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Labour Law > Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Constitutional Rights, Wage Law & Key Judgments\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d0c3867f3f4c9e624a23ce61eb908b33\",\"name\":\"Riya Malkani\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"Riya Malkani\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/riya-malkani\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.","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.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court","og_description":"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00","author":"Riya Malkani","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Riya Malkani","Est. reading time":"28 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/"},"author":{"name":"Riya Malkani","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/d0c3867f3f4c9e624a23ce61eb908b33"},"headline":"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court","datePublished":"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/"},"wordCount":6129,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Labour Law"],"articleSection":["Labour Law"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/","name":"Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Law, Code on Wages &amp; Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-09-30T01:46:46+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-30T01:49:24+00:00","description":"Equal pay for equal work in India: understand Article 39(d), Code on Wages 2019, gender equality, temporary workers and Supreme Court rulings.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/equal-pay-for-equal-work-in-india-law-code-on-wages-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Labour Law > Equal Pay for Equal Work in India: Constitutional Rights, Wage Law & Key Judgments"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/d0c3867f3f4c9e624a23ce61eb908b33","name":"Riya Malkani","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3342efb856a2ec1bf52e46f81a86f9a5?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"Riya Malkani"},"url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/riya-malkani\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33210","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1848"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33210"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33210\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33347,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33210\/revisions\/33347"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33210"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33210"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33210"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}