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