Salary cuts during probation illegal, rules Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that cutting employees’ salaries during their probation period is unlawful, holding that probationers are entitled to full wages for work of a regular nature.

In a verdict that could affect a large number of state government employees, the court struck down a December 2019 circular issued by the state’s General Administration Department that mandated reduced pay for newly recruited staff during probation. According to the circular, employees were paid 70% of their salary in the first year, 80% in the second year and 90% in the third year of probation.

A division bench comprising Justices Vivek Rusia and Deepak Khot held that the policy violated the constitutional principle of “equal pay for equal work”. The court observed that employees on probation perform the same duties and responsibilities as confirmed staff and cannot be paid less solely on the basis of their probationary status.

“The principle of equal pay for equal work applies even during the probation period,” the bench said, adding that any deduction of salary during probation is unlawful. It ruled that employees are entitled to full minimum wages for work of a regular and continuing nature.

The court also directed the Madhya Pradesh government to refund the amounts already deducted from affected employees, ordering that the arrears be paid in full.

The case related to the appointment of Class III and Class IV employees under Section 8(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (General Service Conditions) Rules, 1961. The judges also took issue with the 2019 circular’s differentiation between employees recruited through the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission and those hired via other agencies, describing the distinction as discriminatory.

The ruling reinforces long-standing jurisprudence on wage parity and could prompt other states to revisit similar probation-related pay structures. While the judgment applies directly to Madhya Pradesh government employees, it is expected to influence broader discussions on probationary employment practices in the public sector.

The state government has not yet indicated whether it will challenge the ruling.