Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. And Others vs Chaturth Shreni Ban Karamchari Sangh ... on 2 August, 2010
Bench: Sunil Ambwani, Kashi Nath Pandey
Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 209 of 2007 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. And Others Respondent :- Chaturth Shreni Ban Karamchari Sangh U.P. Ballia Petitioner Counsel :- R.K. Saxena Respondent Counsel :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J.
Hon'ble Kashi Nath Pandey,J.
We have heard learned standing counsel for the appellants. Sri A.K. Srivastava appears for respondents.
This Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 19.9.1996 by which he entertained the writ petition filed by Chaturth Shreni Ban Karamchari Sangh, U.P., Ballia, for payment of minimum wages to the daily wagers, and disposed of the matter on the same day, purportedly with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, as the law which was prevailing at that time with following directions:-
"The writ petition, for the reasons given above, succeeds in part. The respondents are directed to pay salary to the members of the Association numbering 30 disclosed in annexure-1 to this writ petition as is being given and paid to the regular employees of the department in the same cadre and the respondents are further commanded to give benefit of judgement of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15627 of 1998. It is, however, clarified that the respondents shall pay to the employees mentioned in annexure-1 to this writ petition wages/salary at the rates equivalent in the minimum pay-scale of regular employees in the corresponding cadre but without any increment w.e.f. 16.8.1996 viz., the date of presentation of this writ petition in in this Court."
A large number of writ petitions were decided with directions for regularization of daily wage employees of the Forest Department.
In State of U.P. and others Vs. Putti Lal [2002 (3) AWC 2375] decided on 21.2.2002, the Supreme Court considered and decided a batch of appeals with directions to consider all such employees for regularization under the Rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution called 'Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001'. Since a statutory rule was framed indicating the manner in which the daily wagers can be regularized, the Supreme Court observed that the question of framing any further scheme for regularization of daily wagers of Forest Department did not arise.
On the question of payment of wages, on the principle of equal pay for equal work, the Supreme Court directed as follows:-
"5. In several cases, this Court, applying the principle of equal pay for equal work has held that a daily-wager, if he is discharging the similar duties as those in the regular employment of the Government, should at least be entitled to receive the minimum of the pay-scale though he might not be entitled to any increment or any other allowance that is permissible to his counterpart in the Government. In our opinion, that would be the correct position and we, therefore, direct that these daily- wagers would be entitled to draw at the minimum of the pay-scale being received by their counter-part in the Government and would not be entitled to any other allowances or increment so long as they continue as daily-wager. The question of their regular absorption will obviously be dealt with in accordance with the statutory rule already referred to."
The judgment in Putti Lal's case (Supra) was followed by this Court in Janardan Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2008) 1 UPLBEC 498] and Sri Ram Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and others [(2008) 2 UPLBEC 1533].
The learned standing counsel submits that the Supreme Court has in subsequent decisions held that the daily-wager is not entitled to minimum of pay scale and that until regularization, the daily wager is only entitled to continue on daily wage basis.
In the present case, since in respect of similarly situated employees, the Supreme Court has given directions in Putti Lal's case (Supra) on 21.2.2002, we do not find good ground to deviate and to allow discrimination to the similarly situated employees.
The Special Appeal is accordingly disposed of with same directions as are contained in Putti Lal (Supra)'s case. The petitioners shall be considered for regularization under the Rules of 2001 until then they will be continued to be paid wages in the minimum of the pay scale, which is being paid to the regular employees, discharging same duties.
Order Date :- 2.8.2010 nethra