Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Ranglal on 1 August, 2019
Bench: S. Ravindra Bhat, Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1885/2018
1. State Of Rajasthan, ThroughtThe Secretary, Department
Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj (Panchayati
Raj), Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Deputy Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. District Collector, Bhilwara (Raj.)
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Bhilwara,
Rajasthan.
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sahapura, District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
6. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Raipur, District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Appellants
Versus
1. Ranglal S/o Shri Teju Balai, Gram Panchayat Dhanop,
Panchayat Samiti Shahpura, District Bhilwara (Raj.).
2. Kishan Lal Gujajar S/o Shri Ram Gurjar,, Gram Panchayat
Girdiya, Panchayat Samiti Shapura, District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
3. Kailash Chandra S/o Shri Chottu,, Gram Panchayat Mataji
Ka Khera, Panchayat Samiti Sahapura, District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
4. Kailash Chandra S/o Shri Madhu Ji Mali,, Gram Panchayat
Itadiya, Panchayat Samiti Sahapura, District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
5. Om Prakash S/o Shri Gokul Regar,, Gram Panchayat
Sangariya, Panchayat Samiti Sahpura, District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
6. Kutubudeen S/o Shri Ahmed Mohamed,, Gram Panchayat
Pita Ka Khera, Panchayat Samiti Raipur, District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, A.A.G.
Mr. Utkarsh Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gajender Singh Butati,
Mr. Pawan Singh Rathore
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 12:23:28 AM)
(2 of 3) [SAW-1885/2018]
Order
01/08/2019
Civil Misc. Application No.1/2018:
1. For the reasons stated in the application delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The application is allowed.
Special Appeal (Writ) No.1885/2018:
1. In this appeal the State claims to be aggrieved by an order which permitted the writ petitioners to represent, seeking relief similar to which is directed by this Court in Surendra Kumar Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.4582/2017, decided on 03.04.2017 at Jaipur Bench] and other subsequent decisions regarding the payment of minimum wages.
2. It is submitted by the standing counsel that by an order dated 31.07.2019, the minimum wages would not be paid directly to the contract workers on-line, but through the concerned agency or the contractor, who would remit it directly. Learned counsel submits that the State would ensure through a monitoring mechanism that the amounts are actually paid to the contract workers.
3. This Court is of the opinion that the State should evolve a mechanism of directly remitting the amounts of minimum wages to the concerned contract workers, whose details and particulars -
including bank account etc. are maintained by the contractor/agency and supplied to it. This would in no way alter the inter se relationship between the contractor and his/its employees.
4. The writ petitioners' counsel argues that the State should ensure that the arrangement in the contract is directly between (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 12:23:28 AM) (3 of 3) [SAW-1885/2018] the employee who work and State itself. He highlighted that in some instances, the State has resorted to direct engagement of contract workers.
5. This Court is unable to issue such a direction. The manner in which the State organizes its arrangements depends upon the exigencies of the time. In these circumstances it would be impossible to direct that a particular mode or method only should be adopted; the State may resort to direct engagements itself or may resort to employment of contract workers through placement agency/contractor, in accordance with law.
6. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (S. RAVINDRA BHAT),CJ 111-Kshama Dixit/-
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 12:23:28 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)