Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Sri Sanjay Kumar Prusty vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 20 September, 2023
z N &. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNA CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK a O.ANo. 260 /00629 of 2021 Reseryerdd on 15.09 202° Pronounced on CORAM: HON'BLE MEL PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A) Sanjay Kumar Prusty, aged about 36 years, Son of Duryadhan Prusty, At- "Nagari, PO. Mahindharpada, PS- Cuttack Sadar, Dist- Cuttack, was working as a casual worker at Nhandagiri Archaeological Survey of India Site, At/PO/FS- Khandagiri, Dist Khurda, 7O44NH, Odisha. vad picant VERSUS 1. Union of India, Represented through, the Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, Now Del hi PLOODL. 2, INrector General, Archaeslogical Survey of india, Janpath, New Delhi LiOonL 3. Superintending Archagologist, Archaeological Survey of India, Puratatwa Bhawan, At/PO.-Samantrapur Bhubaneswar, Dist- Nhurda, Qdisha-75 1002. avo MESpoNdents For the Applicant: Mr. RC Swain, Counsel For the Respondents: Mr. BN Swain, Counsel ORDER
Pramod Kumar Das, Member [A} Applicant had earlier ap yproached this Tyibunal in OA 23/8 which was disposed of vide a common order dated 28.06.2017 with the following direction:
"8. The OM. dates O7.86.1988 issued by the DOPST has provided as follows '"ahere the nature of work entrusted to the casual workers and regular eniployees. is the same, the casual workers may be paid at the rate of L/80th of the pay at the minimum of the rela ant pay scale a wus dearness allowance for swarkofd hours a day."
In the present case, the Respondents have taken a stand that the applicant were tot entrusted with regular work of a Group 'YY ermployee anc ith yer efore, they de OnOE A fall ie CHES rian laid down by the DUP&T. Althoug eis ade alicant have been incluc ed in the 0 ice Order ¢ 'ated 20. 08. 201 Fab me Respondents Organization as rasual workers completed 240 days af F continuous © work, their case could not he considered far 1/30 st atussfor the reasons mentioned above, However, In the Office order dated 12 = OE 2013 3, 1fe00 status has been conferred upon 08 co he Bi paragraph ofthe order is quoted below. -
In pursuance oF QL Nav 8014; ee Tth Tune 1988 fn Clause-IV issued byt a Department of Personnel and Prainiyg, New | 'Delhi and guidelines issued by the Director General, Archaeological Survey af india, New Delhi vice F. No.08/ 4/85-Adm-{] dated oe » Jat PPORS and subseny SUDS sequ ent Gated Lith May-2000, the following casual Iabourers engaged up to 2004-2005 and conmeted 240 days in a year as on 2010-2011 are allowed to perform the similar "nature of duties of <t Group "D' and will be paid wages @ 1/30th of the pays scale = ats the «minimum oof Group "Dd" Rs AyS0 +4 SO00+D.A, as admissible from me to time wel TSth April, 2012".
As mrentioned above, the order states that § casual labourers engaged upto 2004-05 completing 240 days In a year as on 2020-2011 are allowed te perform the similar nature of duties as Group DD and will be paid wages at the rate of [/S0th of pay scale at the minimum of Group 'D') By this order therefore, the Respondents authorities decided to allow the said 08 casual workers to perferm similar nature of duty of Group 'D° and also that they will be pald wages at the rate of 1/30th of the pay scale. The € a dated 07.06.1988 issued by the DOPST laid down that where the nature af work entrusted to the casual workers arnt regular employees is the same, the casual warkera may be p raid: at the rate of 1 fSOth of the pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allawance for work of & hours a day. In the order dated 12.04.2013 the Respondents Hirst decided that the _ concerned casual workers will be allowed to perform similar duties of regular Group 'D' staff. [bis a canscious decision of the Respondents Department to allow the eligible casual employees to perform duties of a regular employee. The Respondents have not mentioned on which criterian this decision has been taken. it is abundantly clear that itis a conscious decision of the Respondents authorities to allow a casual worker to perform duties of a regular nature. Th ereafler, as a consequence In the same arder the casual labourer is alowed fo be pald at the rate of L/3dth of pay. Therefore, the argument of the Ke spondent ts that the prayer of the applicant In this O.A. cannot be allowed because they Haye not performed the duty of repular Granup 'D' is quite clearly fallacious. Prom the order dated 12.04.2013 It has been made clear that ft Is the Respondents autharities whe decided whom they will allew to perform regular duty of Group 'D' and thereafter T/S0Qth status - fallowed as a consequence, The applicant in the QAs working under the Archaeological Survey of india organization have not been «
--
fn Bin OA Nos, SASS 9 af 2ST Respondents. Therefors, the Respondents contention is that the applicant have not performed the duties of re gua lar of nature is unfair and unsustainable because such decisian can be taken only by the Respondents authurities. Li some "casual workers were allowed to perform duties of regular nature why the present casual workers who approached "the . Tribunal will not be allowed ta do so fs an issue which the Respondents their reply. The Re allaweel to perfurr the duty of a regular nahure by the £ have not addressed aspandent tani 4) ansparent policy fur const dering grayer as per the DO! RT OM, dated O7,06.
mentioned shove, The settlement under Section T2(3) ¢ LD, Act, T9487 which has been brought te the notice Tribunal by the applicant re He SOEs a the cases of casual workers who have completed ; oe 0 days of work shall be Inke for consideration of 1/S0tb staty ve the above pedinesnices the reasons assigned in the impugned arder canmat be supported. The Respondents organisation cow ld up course have thelr own poly for consideration of such cases In aA transparent manner. But as per policy, case of casual workers should be considered and on the around thal the applicant fe never eninisted to discharge the work of a reguisy employee no employee can be ousted from nonsidershion. This is because as articulated in the arder the decision to allow a casual worker to perform duties of a regular Group '0' has been taken by the Be ssponden jis themselves, The Ld ACGSC while replying to the allegations of discrimination has submitted that negative equily can not be claimed. However, making such a submission would amount to Indirect admission that the facility of 1/30th status to the other casual workers was extended in an irregular manner. 1 is notclear from the subi mission of the Respondents what are the criteria they have followed in al owing casual workers fo do work of regular nature same as thal of a Group 'One thing is clear that the claim of the applicant cannot be summarily thrown out The Respondents need to keep their cases under consideration under suitable criteria for conferring 1/30th status by following the guidelines as the Government as laid dewn by the DOPAT in their OM. dated 07.06.1988. [tis also very important to ensure that nr * QA Nos, POO SHES & discrimination and arbitrariness should be completely avoided in the matters of such consideration"
2. Respondents filed Writ Petition Ne. 1252/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa was veased to disposed of the same on 01.08.2019 with direction that the respondents ro examine the case in accordance with law, the order of the Tribunal and the scheme of 1993 and grant the relief to the applicant, if they deserv:
the same, 3 {mn campliance of the order of the Nan'ble High Court af Orissa, Respondents considered the case of the applicant individually and relected the claim and communicated the reasons af rejection vide order dated 31.01.2020 (A/9} as below:
"TH compliane to the order of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa dated OLOS.2019 in WIPIC) No. 1252/2018, the claim of Shri sanjay Ku imar Prusty, Ex-casual worker In ASI, for grant of wages based on 1/30th of the pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale and other benefits was considered in accordance with euidelines and Instructions of DOP&T contained in their OM 7" June, 1988 and the facts of the case are as under .
{. That, the applicant Sri Sanjay Kumar Prusty, was working under Archaeological Survey of India, Bhubaneswar Circle, Bhubaneswar. The applicant has never assigned the duty of the erstwhile regular Group - D post or that of Multitasking Staff (Grp C}) post. In facet, the applicant has been working purely as casual labour under the Conservation Assistant of Bhubaneswar Sub-Cirele, Bhubaneswar against sanctioned estimate and specific work and the wages are being paid to them as per the rate fined by the Labour Commissioner (Central) from thine toe Unie.
2. That as per the circular issued by the Deptt. OF Personne! and Training vide Q.M. No. an June, a8 and chreular issued by the office of Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi dated 07 th fuly 1992 in order to get T/S0th status of pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allowances for wark of S hours a day, the k to be discharged by the cas sual workers nature of the war should be the same as of a regular employee. Shri Di {lip Pradhan has never been entra isted to discharge the duty yf fa regwar employee, therefore the claim of Lye minimum of the relevant pay scale and other ben efits is not applicable to him.
wet . That, if is seen from 38 consoviat raxd Hist of the casual . g labinvers prepared Tmancial 4 ating details o conrpletian af 240 days eng: agemen t t by them under the establishment of Superintending Are oh acolo ist, AM, Bhubaneswar Circle, Shubaneswar vide no. 3/108 /12- judi -
26th March 20 that Bo person hose name sawed te 5 parte similar natite Sot Wo ek or s awarded 1 with WARES based an 1/30uh af the minimum o s applicable gay scale, Therefore the question of any arbitrari ness being shown in the case of the applicant does not aris Se nersons who were assigned work of far mature previously were granted wages based on 1) 30th of the minimum of the applicable pay scale by Superintending Archaeologist, ASI, Bhubaneswar Circle and falling the conditions aid down in DOPST OM dated 07.06.1928. it may also be brought te the notice of the Applicant that the Do PRT has tiie and again directed the Departments that person on ilaily wages $ should not be recruited for work of regular nature, The latest such instruc TEES Shave been issued vide GaP&T OM No. $9047) JO) Pr dated 04 09.2038. Therefore, no irregularities or any flegahty have been committed as alleged by Shri Dilip P assigned the duties of regular nature af the erst hile Group -
9289 dated atthan as he was never : Bae "TEE PESO FUN BLA Nos. EON GPSS D post or that of MTS (Group - C} for qualifying to get 1/30th of the minimum pay.
4. That, the casual labourers have been engaged as per the availability of work provision kept in respective estimates, on need basis according to availability of wark a nd also keeping in view of the find pasition.
S That the Archaeological Survey of India performs the conservation, preservation and protection af Centrally Protected monuments against various estimates. These estimates wind-up after completion of 2 particular work under specific estimate In any particular monument/site. So providing of regular work for entire month or entire year te rhe casual labourers is not possible. Nawever, labourers are being engaged depending upon the requirement of work as ner estimates and existing fund position. No work would be undertaken without making provision either in the yearly Inniget or Conservation Program me/Revised Conservation Programme (CP/RCP). The opposite party in the Instant case ig engaged as per need basis subject to the availability of funds allotted to the organizations in each Hmanclal year for conservation and preservation of pratected monuments. 'ore, such work of conservation & preservation o ior Therel centrally protected monuments is not permanent ane perennial In nature. Immediately after completion of such particular work the casual labourers are disengaged. At mes some of them are alse engaged In other subsequent estimates where there is provision of work and availability of fund and somelhmes ot bre:
& Merely hecause one casual labour completes 240 days in a year or in 3-4 years engaged against one work or the ather will net automatically make him eligible for grant of wages based on 1/30th af the minimurn of the applicable pay scale, plus allowances. In order to be eligible for grant of said benefits he has te ffl the mandatory criteria laid down ip HORST OM dated G7.06.1988, Le he should have been engaged against work of regular nature, tL ANa The opposite party /ori Dip Pradhan has never been nntrusted to discharge the work of regular employee nor at any point of time he has been entrusted to discharge the duty of Group 'TY, presently Multi-Tasking Staff (oreup C} employee, therefore, he is not eligible for grant of 1/S80th pay at the minimum of the relevant pay St ale and the other heneflts as per the TPT, OM so. 400142. Qh-Estic tated 07.06.1988. Besides that, no juniors as claimed by the applicant has given the sai id benefit.
& th the facts and circumstances of the case explained above, the request of Shri Sanjay Kumar Prusty for engagement as a Case} worker in ASL with the bench it af wages payable based en 1/30th of the minima of the applical DA, is not ac ceptable and he fs informed accor 9 This issues with the approv al ol the Competent Authority and accordingly Issued by the Resp jondent No. 3 (Applicant no. Sin the Writ Pelitio yo vbehalf af all the respondents."
hereafter the applicant being aggriev fad filed the present OA with prayer to quash the impugned onder of rejection and direct the respondents to grant them 1/G0% status retrospectively from the date others were granted the same ben elit.
4, Respondents Ned counter contesting the case of the applicant. The applicant has also filed reloinder trying fa justify as to how the stand taken by the respondents in rhelr counter cannot way cat gran yfing the relief claimed in the OA.
16. Ld. Counsel for the applicant relying on the averments made In the olearlings and anmexures Med im supper shereof has vocilerans shy t fay y £ 2} BR % WANs. 28a) AO3 submitted that the settlement made wider Section 12(3) of the Industrial fispute Act, 14? between the management and the Archaeological Survey of india, Bhubaneswar and Archaeol logical Survey Workers Unton over 1/30 pay to causal labourers engaged under the re espondents, the respondents published the ist af casual labourer engaged in the Archaeological Survey of India, Bhubaneswar Cirde on 26.03.2015 (A/V) giving the details relating to the year of thelr engagement and year when they have completed 240 days ot f service and out of the list they have granted 1/30° pay only to eight casual labourers, who were engaged on or before 2004-2005 and completed 240 days as on 2011-12 but did not grant the 1/30 pay scale to the applicant on the plea that they » did not attend the duty of Group-D, Le. Monument Attendant, now MTS as per Viith Pay € 'armission) and, the prefore, the question of payment of 1/S0% pay scale as per circular dat ced] OF.06.1988 does not arise is highly Hlegal, arbitrary and contrary ta the settlement dated 15.09.2011. It has been submitted that itis not the case of the respondents ¢ that the applicant is not discharging 8 hours duty nor have they stated what are the extra duties performed by the casual labourers who had been granted 1/30"
pay scale but the applicant are not per farming the similar duties. It ts further submitted that the applicant has been performing 8 hours duties like that of others yet he has been denied the benefit of minimum wages of 1/30 pay, which 1s Had in law. Further, if is contended that allowing the applicant ta continue in engagement long since, the presumption is there ig need of the department ef the hands of the applicant and, rherefore, instead of taking steps to regularize his s ervices, depriving him the 1/30" pay scale amounts ts exploitation of labour, which carol withstand in the eyes of law. It is 5 sigo submitted that in these bar d days surviving with the wages whi ch he is getting is foo diffienit and, therefore, che respondents ought fo have beer generous enough as a model employer ought to have con widered the case of the applicant passionately for grant of 1/30 pay seate, Accordingly, bd. Counsel for the applicant Hi. On the other hand, relying on che submission made in the pleadings cy the counter and the material placed in support thereof, Ld Counsel for the respondents has subm atted that as per the cireular dated UF 06.1985, performing the duty of a Group D by a casual employee 1s 8 precandivian for grant of the 1/20" wages. Since the applicanc did nat fulfil the terns and conditions af the circu, after considering the matter 3 its entirely, rejected the cham of the ayplicant, which Is just, proper and cannot be mterfered with. Further, it is submitted that the applicant g neither civil etsy servant ser holder of any civil pest rather he is a daily rated worker engaged for specific work in different centrally protected monuments cia Nos, FA YRUGES of PERT cites and the work is not of regular nature, Ne fs not recruited through 4 regular process of selection and he was paid wages as per the Govt. order and, thus, if he has any grievance relating lo non-paynn ent of wages, if is to be adjudicated by the Central Labour Commission and nat by Uils Tribunal. Accordingly, Ld. Counsel for the respondents have strongly objected te the prayer of the applicant and prayed for dismissal of this OA
12. [have given careful consideration to the matter in its entirety with reference to the pleadings and the dacuments pi laced in support thereal wis a vis the arguments advanced by the respective parties. Before going ahead te deal with the contention raised by the respective parties, if is worthwhile to extract the relevant portion of the settlement rade between the management and the workers union 0 18.09.2071 relating to grant of 1/30" pay scale, which is as under:
"TERMS OF SETTLEMENT i. Ibis agreed upon by both the parties that the mat will tt (eligible workmen engaged make 1/30 pay to the cancernedyeng prior te 2002 and those who have completed 240 days up to 2009 & 2010 and continuing til date.
2, Itis agreed upon by the mgt that they will make 1/30"
pay to the concerned workmen those who have been engaged after 2002 and completed 240 days in a year after ¥ aT STINg continuous work of 7 to B years.
3. It is agreed upon by the mgt that taking inte aspect of Nnancial postition they will pay the 1/Q0° wages to: the above Usted workmen from 1.172011.
-- ° me NAS ee i PVA Mos. BGO SOUL 9 af L023 4 tis agreed upon by both the parties that Ure union may prefer te make an appeal regarding grant of temporary sta tus with retraspective effect though the scheme for temporary status has already been effected from S.8.203%.
S tt is agreed upon by the workmen that they will i scharge their duties with utmost discipline, sincerely and asure proper conduct at the work place.
é. en cettiement is reached with the goodwill and yolittan of pa i The " arties shall submit (implementation report ser) one month from the date of effective settement failing which grwill be treated as implemented"
i in compliance of the aforesaid settlement, the respondents have issued the list of casual labourers on 26.03.¢ 2013 and granted 1/30" pay to eight causal labourers, who were engaged on or before c004 -O5 and cormpleted 240 days of work as on S11-12 vide order dated 12.04.2015 stating therein as under:
"In pursuance of OM No. 49014/89-Esst(C) dated 7° fune 1988 in clause TV issue ad by the Department 6 of Personnel and Training, New Delhi and guidelines issued by the Ojrector General, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi vide P.No.O8/4/85-Acm-l dated 20% jan-1989 arid subsequent P.No. 7/2/79. 2fAdmell dated 278 July-To82 and further guidelines Issatc by the Directar Cones eral, ASL New Delhi vide FNe. % af aUS yAdrll dated (7 April-2009 and subsequent dated 21% May- 2009, the follow ving causal labourers engaged upte 2 sA4-2005 and cumpleted 240 days in a year as on 20L-< G1 are alowed fo pel form the similar nature of duties of Group "n°? and will be pale Wages © ay: 308 of the pay scale at the miniman yar Prone' "py Rs 475061 9004DA as admissible from Ume to fivrie's vel ise Apru s 2013.
he casual workers shall discharge ther euny with isefpline, sincere and ensure preper Con ductar their respeclive work place.
ts GANes, THOS The expenditure will be met ot ut from head of wages PN /P) for the financial year 2019-20714,"
14. Brom the above, it is clear that in the settlement it was agr eed upon by the Respondent-Department that they will make | {30 pay to the concerned workmen those whe have been engaged aRer 2002 and campleted 240 days in a year aller rendering camtinuous work of 7 to & years and that they will pay the 1/30" wages to the casual enployers whose nanies sted in the list fromm T11L2011 and, thus, the said settlement having reached its finality, the Respondent-Department cannot wriggle out from the conditions stipulate .d there! in. There is ne mention in the said settlement that 1/30 pay would be allowed to those who are discharging the duties of Gr.D/MTS. Further, vide order dated 12.04.2041) L/S0 pay was allowed to eight casual employees with the conditton that they are allowed to perform the similar nature of duties of Group "DY and will be paid wages @ 1/30" of the pay scale at the minimum of Group "D" Rs, 4750s 13004DA as admissible from Ume te time wel 15° April 201s Thus, no grounds has been stated either In the order of rejection ar in the counter as to why the applicant is not allowed to perform the similar nature of duties of Group [se as to enable him to draw the 1/20° Pay. is alsa noted that law is well settled that Hnancial constraint cannot be a valid justification te deny the benefit to employees. Equally it is well id Tha Nas, B6QVOGSTI of BE a settled law that discretion cannot be exercised discriminatorily nor can they adoot different principle to similarly situated employees at their whims, It ig aot the case of the Respandents that although the Applicant was asked to discharge the duties of Gr. D he refused to carry out the same. The issue of grant of 1/80" pay to the workmen feasual labourers} of the department was the issue before the Asst. Labour Commissioner, Bhubaneswar wherein the respondents authority agreed that they wil make 1/50 pay to the concerned eligible casual er nployees engaged prior to 2002 and those who have completed 240 days up to 2009-10 and are continuing Wl date. They have also agreed that they will pay 1/308 pay to the concerned workmen {casual labourer], those who have been eneaged de after 2002 and completed 240 days in a year after rendering continuous work of 7-8 years and taking inte consideration the financial condition they wil pay the T/S0" wages fo the fisted workmen from QL 12011.
Accordingly, the respondents have granted the 1 /30 pay to the casual bes labourers engaged prior to 2002 and those wi ho have connpleterd 240 days up to 2009-10 and te the eight persons, who were engaged on or before 2004-08 and completed 2410 days ag on 2U11-12. In the order of rejection sa alsa in the counter, it is the stand of the respandents that as the ~ applicant did not perform the du as per the DoP&T circular dt 106.
- ws . . Bes j > ThA No, 2808 GSE we O24 pay. But, the respondents did not deny or make distinction relating to the hours of duty performed by the applicant and the regular Group-D/MTS employee of the department The respondents have also not distinctly stated what are the duties of Group-D/MTS employees required to be performed by the regular Group-D/MTS employees of the department but the applicant did nat do so, When the respondents department allowed the applic ant to continue to discharge the duties as casual labourer long since, it is for them to provide the work to the applicant, which are being perfarmed by a rezular Group-U/MTS employee as has been done In case ofS persons. Therefore, denying the 1/208 pay ta the applicant merely stating that they are not attending the duty of the Monument Attendant, now MTS, they are not entitled te 1/0! pay, without speciiically stating what are the duties of the Monument Attendant, which the applicant did not discharge, does not sound to appeal to the fudicial conscience. It is nataine that one can also realize as to how it is difficult to maintain Hfe with the meagre amount of wages which the applicant are getting. The right to fe and personal Nberty of a person can be cenrived by law on the condition that the procedure prescribed by that law is reasonable, fay, and just, Further, it is clarified that the right te Hfe does not merely mean animal existence, It is seen that the DoP&T asain issued anther O.M. OM.
Mm f No. 49014 /0 /2017-Eact(C} dated O20 2019 on the subject of grant of 1S ChANod. TOK MOGI of FEI L{SO® pay to the casual labourers wherein it has been directed that "Where the nature of work entrusted to the casual workers and regular employees is the same, the casual workers may be paid at the rate of 130th of the pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allowance for werk af S hours a day. In cases where the + casual worker is different from the work done by a regular emplos casual worker may be paid only the minimum wages notified by te Ministry of Labour & Employment or the State Govern ent/Union Territery Administration, whichever is higher, as per the Minimum Wages Act, 1948" Going through the aforesald OM, the DoP&T have made the ntention very clear that where the 'nature of work' entrusted fo the casual labourers is the sare ase) ntrusted fo the regular employees and working s hours are also the same, ar to say, minimum § hours of day, they should not have been have been discriminated against by stating that the applicant have never 'attended' the duty of Group "D' Le. Monument Attendant (Now MTS as per Vilth Pay Commission). Trite is the position af law that discrimination within one homogeneous group is contrary to law and the mandate enshrined In Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution af India. Entidement of 1/80" to casual labourers came up for consiveration wefore coordinate Bench of the CAT, fadhpur Bench In QA No. SST /2012 decided on 14.08.2011 ( Abdul Radar and Ors. vs. Union af india and t 8 x \? QA Nos, ZER/O0829 oF O24 Ors.) which was upheld by the Hon "ble Rajasthan High Court in Chi QA fo. 196 (2020 Writ Petition Nod (2013 titled UOl and others vs. Abdul oo Kadar and others. The relevant portion of the decision fs quoted herein "After having given thoughtfal consideration to the rival submissions and having examine d the record, We are unable to Hind any jurisdictional error in the order in apugned Sc GS consider interference in the writ jurisdiction.
As noticed above, by the anders dated 2/1 7 112 COG and S.LO.2010, the petitioners can sciousy pr -ovided for fixation and enhancement of daily rates of the wages for the casual labourers, The orders id not daw any distinction In the Casual workers bolding temporary Statics and other casusl workers, As noticed, the department had cursciously issued earlier the memorandum dated 07.06.1988 providing that where the nature of the work entrusted to the casual Ishourers ark) regul es be the same, the casual labourers would be paid '@ t 7B of the pay at the minimum of the relevant pay scale plus dearness allowance fur a work of 8 hours per day.
For the fsets that the nature of work entrusted to the applicant is the same as entrusted ta the regular employees and their working hours are aiso the same, or fa Ssy, minimum & hours of day, in our view, they could not have been discrimimated agat inst by providing that they weald be getting the wages lesser status, The CAT has recorded categorical findings that the nature af rhe duties being performed by the applicant has not ar adergone a change: and that the applicant have been performing ¢ the duties af the regular employees ar even more. These findings have not, as such been pat to contention before us, and rightly soa. The department has never add faced any material to p show that for the applicant, there had been a shortened | length of the duties op lesser OA No, 1968/2020 quantum of work t than the regular employees or any other difference is the nature af the duties. That being the position, the view taken by the CAT that there was mathing cagent avai able with the petiioners to re duce or rR nets LOE a& SRA Nos ZERO R08 29 of anat alter thes wage | structure to the dissdvantage of the applicant e saya oa yor oe widle concluding, we may observe thag the order as passed by th ve CAT and this order relate any ta che gure estiun oF wages of the applicant a le warking as the casual workers snd the subject matter s af these petitions is met rer tated fo ay other issue. Ther 'efore, ei iS "alway s open for the parties t otherwise take recourse to the appropriate proc ecdin a IN arcardance owhh law :
in the Instant case as alreai aby noted, if ds not the case of the Respondents that the 'nature of work' being performed by the Applicant sre not the same and similar to chat of regular Group D (MTS). In the esreumstances this Tribunal is not convinced on the stand of the © Respondents that as the applicant are not 'stranding the duly of A fae wn x Gr, D employee they are not entitled to 1/30" pay. Taking Into consideration all totality of the matter Le conditions stipulated Is the sfemoarandum of Settiernent, NOPRT OM the order wherein only eight casual labourers were granted 1/808 pay scale, | am of the consiiered view that the Respandents 2 need to consider/rec ansider the case af the applicant far grant of 1/30" pay. Accord ingly, the impugned orders are hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the authority concerned to consider/reconsider the grancof 1/30 pay tet the applicant in the fight of the discussions mex de above, within a periad of thirty days & y g 3 ;
:
x x x x ¢ ee . ty pray payer ed ce eu LA Nag, SEO sO8G29 of fram the date of receipt of a copy of this arder arni the decision so taken to be communicated to the applicant ina well reasoned and speaking order.
iS. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this OA is disposed of by leaving the parties to bear their own casts.
oe