Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
B. Sivagiri, S/O. B. Bhaskaraiah, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By Its ... on 19 April, 2023
1
W.P.No.12565 of 2015
VS,J
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.12565 of 2015
ORDER:
The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"...to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing the Resolution No.6, dt.25.10.2008, passed by the Devasthanam for treating the petitioners as daily wage contract workers of the 2nd respondent Devasthanam and not paying the wages fixed by the 1 st respondent in his proceedings dt.05.02.2013 is illegal, arbitrary, highhanded, discriminatory and violative of Minimum Wages Act and other Labour Legislations and also violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to implement the Resolution No.6, dt.25.10.2008 and pay the wages as prescribed by the 1st respondent Commissioner in his proceedings dt.05.02.2013..."
2. The petitioners herein are originally engaged by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the year 2006 as daily wage contract workers to work in various departments of the Devasthanam and the 3rd respondent-Board of Trustee herein, took a decision to pay Rs.50/- per day to each and every contract worker including the petitioners herein. The said resolution has been approved by the 1st respondent herein vide proceedings dated 27.04.2005. Subsequently, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have engaged 110 2 W.P.No.12565 of 2015 VS,J persons as contract workers on daily wage basis including the petitioners herein and were paid Rs.50/- per day from June, 2005. Though the Devasthanam had engaged 110 daily wage workers to attend day to day skilled and unskilled works in various departments, it has retained 66 persons, by taking the rest to work through outsourcing system under Srinivasa Security Agencies and Seridevi Solutions.
3. Thereafter, basing on the assurance given by the Devasthanam, to consider the petitioners as contract workers at a later point of time, the petitioners have started working through outsourcing agencies. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3, in order to fulfill the assurance given to the petitioners, took a policy decision to consider the petitioners as daily wage contract workers in sanitary wing of Devasthanam, on payment as fixed by the authorities from time to time. Accordingly, the Board of Trustees of the 2nd respondent Devasthanam have passed resolution No.6, dated 25.10.2008, accepting the request of the petitioners to consider them as daily wage workers in sanitary department and had forwarded the same to the 1st respondent- Commissioner of Endowments herein, vide letter dated 06.11.2008, for nominal approval.
4. The Executive Officer of the 2nd respondent Devasthanam has specifically stated in his letter dated 3 W.P.No.12565 of 2015 VS,J 06.11.2008 that the income of the Devasthanam is increasing day by day and that the establishment charges of the Temple are not more than 10% of the income derived and the services of the petitioners herein are very much essential in sanitary and other departments and without their presence, the administration and the essential services of the Devasthanam will be paralyzed. Despite several representations made by the petitioners, for engaging them as daily wage workers in the sanitary and other departments attached to Devasthanam, the 1st respondent herein has not given its nominal approval, aggrieved by which, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.
5. When the matter came up for admission on 27.04.2015, this Court was pleased to pass an interim order as follows:
"The respondents are directed to regulate the entire affairs keeping in view the circular instructions contained in circular No.A1/4824/2013, dated 05.02.2013, issued by the Commissioner of Endowments Department in the matter of payment of wages."
6. Heard Mr. Y. V. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A. Sreekanth Reddy, learned Standing Counsel.
4W.P.No.12565 of 2015
VS,J
7. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that, in pursuance of the interim orders granted by this Court on 27.04.2015, the petitioners are being paid the salary in accordance to the circular instructions dated 05.02.2015 and thereafter, the said salaries have also been enhanced from time to time. He further requested this Court to make the interim order as final order.
8. Accordingly, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by directing the respondents to continue paying salaries to the petitioners as per the existing circulars/rules, till the petitioners attain the age of superannuation.
9. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________ V. SUJATHA, J Date: 19.04.2023.
GSS 5 W.P.No.12565 of 2015 VS,J 138 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA W.P. No.12565 of 2015 Date: 19.04.2023 GSS