{"id":138946,"date":"1987-10-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1987-10-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987"},"modified":"2018-01-01T14:11:11","modified_gmt":"2018-01-01T08:41:11","slug":"daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","title":{"rendered":"Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1987 AIR 2342, \t\t 1988 SCR (1) 598<\/div>\n
Author: E Venkataramiah<\/div>\n
Bench: Venkataramiah, E.S. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nDAILY RATED CASUAL LABOUR EMPLOYEDUNDER P & T DEPARTMENT THR\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT27\/10\/1987\n\nBENCH:\nVENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)\nBENCH:\nVENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)\nRANGNATHAN, S.\n\nCITATION:\n 1987 AIR 2342\t\t  1988 SCR  (1) 598\n 1988 SCC  (1) 122\t  JT 1987 (4)\t164\n 1987 SCALE  (2)844\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1988 SC 517\t (3)\n R\t    1988 SC 519\t (4)\n D\t    1989 SC1117\t (3)\n F\t    1990 SC 883\t (2,8)\n F\t    1991 SC 101\t (223,241)\n RF\t    1991 SC1173\t (6)\n\n\nACT:\n     Constitution of  India, 1950:  Articles 14,  16, 37 and\n38(2)-Posts and\t Telegraphs  Department-Daily  rated  casual\nlabour-Classification on  basis of number of days of service\nfor payment of wages-Whether Constitutional, justifiable and\ntenable\t whether   opposed  to\t International\tCovenant  on\nEconomic, Social  and Cultural\tRights-Non-regularisation of\ntemporary employees  or casual\tlabour-Whether a wise policy\nDirections issued  for preparation  of scheme for absorption\nof casual labourers.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n%\n     International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural\nRights,\t  1966:\t   Article    7-Casual\t  labour-Justifiable\nclassification\tfor   payment  of   wages-Necessity  of-Non-\nregularisation\tof  service-Not\t wise  policy-Necessity\t for\nabsorption as permanent workers.\n     The petitioners who were working as 'Daily Rated Casual\nLabour'\t in   the  Posts  and  Telegraphs  Department,\twere\ncategorised as\tunskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers.\nBy the\torders of  the D.G.,  Post and Telegraphs Department\nNo.  28-II\/77-SR\/STM   dated  15.5.80  and  10-4\/83-R  dated\n26.7.84 they  were further classified into (i) those who had\nnot completed  720 days of service; (ii) those who had comp-\nleted 720  days and  not completed 1200 days of service, and\n(iii) those  who  had  completed  more\tthan  1200  days  of\nservice, and  were granted  different rates of wages as laid\ndown therein.  Aggrieved by  these orders,  the\t petitioners\nsubmitted a statement of demands through their federation to\nthe authorities, claiming regularisation, payment of interim\nrelief and  bonus, supply  of  dresses,\t leave\tand  medical\nfacilities etc.\n     Not satisfied  with the  reply received  by  them,\t the\npetitioners filed writ petitions, for the issue of a writ in\nthe nature  of mandamus\t to the Union of India and to direct\nit to  pay them\t same salary, allowances, and other benefits\nas were being paid to regular and permanent employees of the\nUnion of India in corresponding cadres and to regularise the\n599\nservice of  the casual\tlabour who  had been  in  continuous\nservice for  more than\t6 months.  Their principal complaint\nwas that  even though  many of them had been working for the\nlast ten  years as  casual labourers, the wages paid to them\nwere very  low and  far less  than the salary and allowances\npaid to\t regular  employees  of\t the  Posts  and  Telegraphs\nDepartment  belonging  to  the\tequivalent  categories\tand,\nsecondly that  no scheme  had been  prepared by the Union of\nIndia to  absorb them  regularly in its service and they had\nbeen denied  the  benefits  of\tincrements,  pension,  leave\nfacilities etc.\t etc. which  were enjoyed  by those  who had\nbeen recruited regularly.\n     The  petitioners\twere  opposed\tby  the\t respondents\ncontending  that  since\t the  petitioners  belonged  to\t the\ncategory of  casual labour  and\t were  not  being  regularly\nemployed, they\twere not  entitled to  the  same  privileges\nwhich regular employees were enjoying.\n     Disposing of the writ petitions,\n^\n     HELD:  1.1\t The  classification  of  employees  in\t the\npresent case  into casual  employees and regularly recruited\nemployees for  the purpose  of paying  less than the minimum\npay payable to employees in the corresponding regular cadres\nparticularly in\t the lowest  rungs of  the department, where\nthe pay\t scales are  the lowest\t is not tenable. The further\nclassification of  casual labourers  into three\t categories,\nnamely, (i)  those  who\t have  not  completed  720  days  of\nservice; (ii)  those who  have completed 720 days of service\nand not\t completed 1200 days of service, and (iii) those who\nhave completed\tmore than  1200\t days  of  service  for\t the\npurpose of  payment of\tdifferent rates\t of wages is equally\nuntenable. There  is clearly  no justification for doing so.\nSuch a\tclassification is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of\nthe Constitution.  It is  also\topposed\t to  the  spirit  of\nArticle 7  of the International Covenant on Economic, Social\nand Cultural  Rights, 1966 which exhorts all States, parties\nto the\tCovenant to  ensure fair  wages and  equal wages for\nequal work. [608E-H]\n     1.2 The  State cannot  deny at least the minimum pay in\nthe pay scales of regularly employed workmen even though the\nGovernment may\tnot be\tcompelled  to  extend  all  benefits\nenjoyed\t by   regularly\t recruited  employees.\tSuch  denial\namounts to exploitation of labour. [608Dl\n     1.3 The  Government should\t be  a\tmodel  employer.  It\ncannot take  advantage of  its dominant position, and compel\nany worker to work\n600\neven as\t a casual labourer on starving wages. It may be that\nthe casual  labourer has  agreed to  work on such low wages.\nThat he\t has done,  because he\thas no\tother choice.  It is\npoverty that has driven him to that state. [608E-Fl\n     1.4 It  may be  that  the\tpetitioners  have  not\tbeen\nregularly recruited,  but many\tof them\t have  been  working\ncontinuously for  more than  a year  in the  Department, and\nsome of\t them have  been engaged  as  casual  labourers\t for\nnearly ten  years. They\t are  rendering\t the  same  kind  of\nservice which  is being\t rendered by  the regular  employees\ndoing the same type of work. [608A-B]\n     1.5 Even  though the  Directive Principle\tcontained in\nArticle 38(2)  may not\tbe enforceable\tas such by virtue of\nArticle 37  of the  Constitution of  India, it may be relied\nupon to\t show that  they  have\tbeen  subjected\t to  hostile\ndiscrimination. [608C ]\n     Dhirendra Chamoli\tand Another v. State of U.P.,<\/a> [1986]\n1 SCC V 637, relied on.\n     2.1 Non-regularisation of temporary employees or casual\nlabour for a long period is not a wise policy. 610E-F]\n     2.2 India\tis a  socialist\t republic.  It\timplies\t the\nexistence of cer-\n     tain important  obligations  which\t the  State  has  to\ndischarge. Many\t rights like  right to\twork, equal  pay for\nequal work,  security of  work, etc.  have to  be ensured by\nappropriate legislation and executive measured. [609D-E]\n     2.3 If  a person  does not\t have the  feeling  that  he\nbelongs to  an organisation  engaged in\t production, he will\nnot put\t forward his best effort to produce more. That sense\nof belonging  arises only  when he feels that he will not be\nturned out  of employment  the\tnext  day  at  the  whim  of\nmanagement. Security  of work  should as  far as possible be\nassured to  the employees so that they may contribute to the\nmaximisation of production. Managements and the Governmental\nagencies in particular should not allow workers to remain as\ncasual labourers  or temporary employees for an unreasonably\nlong period of time. [609G-H; 610A]\n     2.4 The  employees belonging  to skilled,\tsemi-skilled\nand unskilled  classes can be shifted from one department to\nanother even  if there\tis no  work to\tbe done\t in a  given\nplace.\tAdministrators\tshould\trealise\t even  as  a  casual\nlabourer on  starving wages.  It  may  be  that\t the  casual\nlabourer has  agreed to\t work on such low wages. That he has\ndone, because he has no other choice. It is poverty that has\ndriven him to that state. [608E-F]\n601\nthat if\t any worker  remains idle  on any  day, the  country\nloses the  wealth that\the would  have produced\t during that\nday. Our wage structure is such that a worker is always paid\nless than what he produces. [610B-C]\n     3. The  Union of  India and  the other  respondents are\ndirected to  pay wages\tto the\tworkmen who  are employed as\ncasual labourers  at the  rate equivalent to the minimum pay\nin the\tpay scales  of the regularly employed workers in the\ncorresponding cadres  but without any increments with effect\nfrom  5th  of  February,  1986\tand  corresponding  Dearness\nAllowance and  Addl. Dearness  Allowances, if  any,  payable\nthereon. Other\tbenefits which\tare now being enjoyed by the\ncasual labourers  shall continue to be extended to them. The\narrears of  wages payable  shall be paid within four months.\n[609B-C; 610G]\n     The respondents  are directed  to prepare\ta scheme for\nabsorbing as  far as  possible the casual labourers who have\nbeen continuously  working for\tmore than  one year  in\t the\nPosts and Telegraphs Departments 610-Fl\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 373 of 1986.
\n     (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
\n     A.K. Goel,\t E.X. Joseph  and  N.S.\t Das  Bahl  for\t the
\npetitioners.\n<\/p>\n
     V.C. Mahajan, Girish Chandra, Mrs. Sushma Suri and Miss
\nA. Subhashini for the Respondents.\n<\/p>\n
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n     VENKATARAMIAH, J.\tThese petitions\t are filed on behalf
\nof persons who are working as ‘Daily Rated Casual Labour’ in
\nthe Posts and Telegraphs Department. The ‘Daily Rated Casual
\nLabour’ includes  three broad categories of workers, namely,
\nunskilled, semiskilled\tand skilled.  The  unskilled  labour
\nconsists of  safai workers,  helpers,  peons  etc.  and\t are
\nmostly engaged\tin digging, carrying loads and other similar
\ntypes  of   work.  The\t semi-skilled  labour\tconsists  of
\ncarpenters, wiremen, draftsmen, A.C. mechanics etc. who have
\ntechnical experience  but do not hold any degree or diploma.
\nThe skilled  labour consists of labour doing technical work,
\nwho hold requisite degrees\/diplomas.\n<\/p>\n
     The principal complaint of the petitioners is that even
\nthough
\n602<\/span>
\nmany of\t them have  been working  for the  last ten years as
\ncasual A  labourers, the wages paid to them are very low and
\nfar less  than the salary and allowances paid to the regular
\nemployees of  the Posts\t and Telegraphs Department belonging
\nto each\t of the categories referred to above and secondly no
\nscheme has  been prepared  by the  Union of  India to absorb
\nthem regularly\tin its\tservice and  consequently they\thave
\nbeen denied the benefits, such as increments, pension, leave
\nfacilities etc.\t etc. which  are enjoyed  by those  who have
\nbeen recruited\tregularly. They\t allege that  they are being
\nexploited by the Union of India.\n<\/p>\n
     They have\tproduced the  order of the Director General,
\nPosts and  Telegraphs Department bearing No. 28-II\/77-SR\/STN
\ndated 15.5.1980\t which prescribes the rate or rates of wages
\npayable to  the casual\tlabour in the Telecommunication Wing
\nof the\tDepartment. The\t relevant part\tof the\torder  reads
\nthus:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t      “No. 28-II\/77-SR\/STN
\n\t      Office of the Director General Posts
\n\t\t\t and Telegraphs,
\n\t\t\t\t\t\tNew Delhi-1,
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t   15.5.1980
\n\t  To
\n\t       …………………………
\n\t       Subject:\t Increase in rate of daily wages for
\n\t\t\t the casual  labour employed  in the
\n\t\t\t Telecom. Wing of P & T.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       The  employment\t of  casual  labour  in\t the
\n\t  Telecom. Wing,  who are  working for\ta reasonably
\n\t  long period,\ton continuous  basis was  one of the
\n\t  items under  discussion in  the P  & T  Department
\n\t  council (JCM).  The potential of absorption of the
\n\t  large force of casual mazdoor in regular grade was
\n\t  limited  on  the  Telecommunication  side.  As  an
\n\t  alternative to  regular absorption it was proposed
\n\t  that a  wage related\tto the\tminimum of  the\t pay
\n\t  scale of Time-Scale Group-D cadre with the benefit
\n\t  of neutralisation  for the  rise in  cost-Index as
\n\t  applicable to regular employees may be effected.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
603<\/span><\/p>\n
\t       2. The  President is  now pleased  to  decide
\n\t  that the  A rates  of daily  wages for  the casual
\n\t  labour employed in the Telecom. Wing of P & T will
\n\t  be as follows:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (i) Casual  labour who  has not completed 720 days
\n\t  of service  in a period of three years at the rate
\n\t  of 240  days per  annum with\tthe Department as on
\n\t  1.4.80.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  _________________________________________________
\n\t  No change.  They will\t continue to  be paid at the
\n\t  approved local rates.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (ii) Casual  labour who  having been\tworking with
\n\t  the Department  from 1.4.77  or earlier  and\thave
\n\t  completed 720 days of service as on 1.4.80.
\n\t  __________________________________________________
\n\t  Daily wages  equal to 75% of 1\/30th of the minimum
\n\t  of Group time Scale plus admissible D.A.
\n\t  _________________________________________________\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (iii) Casual\tlabour who  has been  working in the
\n\t  Department  from   1.4.1975  or  earlier  and\t has
\n\t  completed 1200 days of service as on 1.4.1980.
\n\t  _________________________________________________
\n\t  Daily wages  equal to 1\/30th of the minimum of the
\n\t  Group Time  Scale plus  1\/30th of  the  admissible
\n\t  D.A.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (iv)\tAll  the  casual  labourers  will,  however,
\n\t  continue to be employed on daily wages only.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (v) These  orders for\t enhanced rates for category\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (ii) & (iii) above will take effect from 1.5.80.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (vi) A review will be carried out every year as on
\n\t  the Ist of April for making officials eligible for
\n\t  wages indicated in paras (ii) and (iii) above.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (vii) The  above arrangement\tof enhanced rates of
\n\t  daily\t wages\t will  be   without   prejudice\t  to
\n\t  absorption  of  causal  mazdoors  against  regular
\n\t  vacancies as and they occur
\n\t  ………………………………………….\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
604<\/span><\/p>\n
\t\t\t      sd\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t       (M.S. Yegneshwaran)
\n\t\t Asst. Director General (Stn.)”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The above\torder  is  followed  by\t the  another  order
\nbearing No. 10-4\/83-R dated 26.7.1984 which reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n
\t  To
\n\t       All General Managers Telecom.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  Subject:  Increase in rates of daily wages for the
\n\t\t    casual\/ semi-skilled\/skilled labour.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n\t  Sir,\n\t       The   employment\t   of\tthe    casual\tsemi\n<\/pre>\n
\t  skilled\/skilled labour  in the  Telecom. Wing\t who
\n\t  are working  for  a  reasonably  long\t period,  on
\n\t  continuous basis  has been  engaging the attention
\n\t  of this  Directorate for  quite sometime past. The
\n\t  potential of\tabsorption of  labour of the type in
\n\t  regular grade was limited on the Telecommunication
\n\t  side. As  an alternative to regular absorption the
\n\t  need was  being felt\tthat  wage  related  to\t the
\n\t  minimum of  the pay  scale of semi skilled skilled
\n\t  casual labour\t with the  benefit of neutralisation
\n\t  for the  rise\t in  cost  index  as  applicable  to
\n\t  regular employees may be effected as is at present
\n\t  available  to\t casual\t un-skilled  labour  working
\n\t  under the P & T Department.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  2. The President is now pleased to decide that the
\n\t  rates of  daily wages for the semi-skilled\/skilled
\n\t  casual labour employed in the Telecom. Wing of the
\n\t  P & T Department will be as under:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (i) Casual semi-skilled\/skilled labour who has not
\n\t  completed 720\t days of  service over\ta period  of
\n\t  three years or more with the department.
\n\t  _________________________________________________
\n\t  No change.  They will\t continue to  be paid at the
\n\t  approved local rates.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (ii) Casual  semi-skilled\/skilled labour  who\t has
\n\t  completed
\n605<\/span>
\n\t  720 days  of service\tover a period of three years
\n\t  or more.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  _________________________________________________
\n\t       Daily wage  equal to  75% of  1\/30th  of\t the
\n\t  minimum of the scale of semi-skilled (Rs. 210-270)
\n\t  or skilled  (Rs.260-350) as  the case may be, plus
\n\t  admissible DA\/ADA thereon.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (iii) Casual Labour who has completed 1200 days of
\n\t  service over a period of 5 years or more.
\n\t  __________________________________________________
\n\t       Daily wage  equal to 1\/30th of the minimum of
\n\t  the pay scale of semi-skilled (Rs.210-270) skilled
\n\t  (Rs.260-350) as  the\tcase  may  be,\tplus  DA\/ADA
\n\t  admissible thereon.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (iv) All  the casual\tsemi-skilled\/skilled  labour
\n\t  will, however\t continue to  be employed  on  daily
\n\t  wages only.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (v) These  orders for\t enhanced rates for category\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (ii)\tand   (iii)  above  will  take\teffect\tfrom
\n\t  1.4.1984.  (vi)   A  review\tfor  making  further
\n\t  officials eligible  for wages\t vide (ii) and (iii)
\n\t  above will  take effect  as on  Ist of April every
\n\t  year.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (vii) If  the rates calculated vide (ii) and (iii)
\n\t  above happen\tto be  less than  the approved local
\n\t  rates, payment shall be made as per approved local
\n\t  rates for above categories of labour.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (viii) The above arrangements of enhanced rates of
\n\t  daily\t wages\t will  be   without   prejudice\t  to
\n\t  absorption of\t casual semi-skilled\/skilled  labour
\n\t  against regular vacancies as and when they occur.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (ix) The benefit of increased rates of daily wages
\n\t  will\tnot   be  admissible  to  the  casual  semi-
\n\t  skilled\/skilled   labour   in\t  whose\t  case\t the
\n\t  continuous spells  of duty  are  intervened  by  a
\n\t  period of  more than\tsix months.  The absence  of
\n\t  more than  six months may, however, be condoned by
\n\t  the Divisional  Engineer on one of the two grounds
\n\t  namely, prolonged illness on production of medical
\n\t  certificates\tor   nonemployment   due   to\tnon-
\n\t  availability of work. In the case of
\n606<\/span>
\n\t  absence beyond  six months at a time on account of
\n\t  illness for  the past\t years,\t the  production  of
\n\t  medical certificate  may not\tbe insisted upon and
\n\t  the  period  of  break  may  be  condoned  if\t the
\n\t  Divisional  Engineer\t is  satisfied\t about\t the
\n\t  genuineness of the absence\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  4.  These   enhanced\trates  of  daily  wages\t are
\n\t  applicable  to   the\tsemi-skilled\/skilled  casual
\n\t  labour who  strictly conform to the job content of
\n\t  corresponding regular\t posts in  scales of Rs.210-
\n\t  270 and  Rs.260-350 as  the case  may be  and that
\n\t  there\t should\t  not  be   any\t variation   in\t the
\n\t  respective  job   con\t tent.\tIn  case  of  slight
\n\t  variation\/doubt cases\t may be\t referred to the . .
\n\t  P. & T for review .\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t\t\t\t   Yours faithfully,
\n\t\t\t\t\t      (V. Ramaswamy)
\n\t\t\t Assistant Director General (Stn. )”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Aggrieved by  the discrimination  made against  them by
\nthese orders  which very  heavily weighed  against them, the
\npetitioners submitted  a statement  of demands\tthrough\t the
\nSecretary General,  BPTEF, New\tDelhi, of  which  they\twere
\nmembers,  claiming   regularisation  of\t  casual  labourers,
\npayment of  interim relief,  payment  of  bonus,  supply  of
\ndresses, leave\tand medical  facilities etc. They received a
\nreply from  the Department on January 10, 1986 which read as
\nunder :-\n<\/p>\n
\t  “Sub: Demands of casual labour-daily rated
\n\t  workers.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  Ref: Your letter No. PF\/Casual Labour\/86 dated 13.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  12. 1985.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       Please refer  to your above cited letter. The
\n\t  position regarding  the various  demands  in\tyour
\n\t  above cited letter is as below:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (i) Regularisation of Casual Labour.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       This  is\t  being\t  done\t as   per   existing
\n\t  instructions of department of Personnel & Training
\n\t  as against the vacancies as and when they arise.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
607<\/span><\/p>\n
\t  (ii) Payment of interim relief.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       Revision of  wages is done once in a year for
\n\t  casual labourers of category 1 (those who have not
\n\t  completed 720\/120O days in 3\/5 years) in the month
\n\t  of April  taking into account the prevailing local
\n\t  rates in  consultation with the local authorities.
\n\t  However, in  respect of  categories (ii) and (iii)
\n\t  i.e. for those who have completed 720\/1200 days in
\n\t  3\/5 years,  the  revision  is\t done  as  and\twhen
\n\t  DA\/ADA.  Interim  Reliefs  are  being\t granted  to
\n\t  regular staff\t at the\t rate of  3\/4th full  of the
\n\t  minimum of the scale of regular class-IV employees
\n\t  …………….\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (vii)\t      Regularisation\t\t\t  of
\n\t  skilled\/semi\/skilled\/
\n\t  unskilled labour in similar grade:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       Provision has  been made\t in the\t recruitment
\n\t  rules whereever  possible to\tgive  preference  in
\n\t  recruitment for corresponding semi-skilled\/skilled
\n\t  workers. Regarding  unskilled labour, they will be
\n\t  taken as  Group staff as and when vacancies arise,
\n\t  on their  becoming eligible  for absorption as per
\n\t  instruction of DGP & T.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t(S. KRISHAN)
\n\t\t\t\t\t       DIRECTOR (ST)
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t 10.1.1986.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The petitioners were not satisfied with the above reply
\nreceived by them. They, therefore, filed the above petitions
\nand the\t first of them bearing Writ Petition No. 302 of 1986
\nwas filed  on 5.2.1986 for the issue of a writ in the nature
\nof mandamus to the Union of India to direct it to pay to the
\npetitioners same salary and allowances and other benefits as
\nare being paid to the regular and permanent employees of the
\nUnion of India in the corresponding cadres and to direct the
\nUnion of  India to  regularise the  service  of\t the  casual
\nlabour who  had been in continuous service for more than six
\nmonths.\n<\/p>\n
     The allegation made in the petitions to the effect that
\nthe petitioners\t are being  paid wages\tfar  less  than\t the
\nminimum pay  payable under  the pay scales applicable to the
\nregular employees  belonging to corresponding cadres is more
\nor  less  admitted  by\tthe  respondents.  The\trespondents,
\nhowever, contend  that since  the petitioners  belong to the
\ncategory of  casual  labour  and  are  not  being  regularly
\nemployed, they
\n608<\/span>
\nare not\t entitled to  the same\tprivileges which the regular
\nemployees are  enjoying. It may be true that the petitioners
\nhave not been regularly recruited but many of them have been
\nworking continuously  for more than a year in the Department
\nand some  of them  have been engaged as casual labourers for
\nnearly ten  years. They\t are  rendering\t the  same  kind  of
\nservice which  is being\t rendered by  the regular  employees
\ndoing the same type of work. Clause (2) of Article 38 of the
\nConstitution of\t India which  contains one  of the Directive
\nPrinciples of  State Policy  provides that “the State shall,
\nin  particular,\t strive\t to  minimise  the  inequalities  in
\nincome, and  endeavour to  eliminate inequalities in status,
\nfacilities and\topportunities, not  only amongst individuals
\nbut also  amongst groups  of people  residing  in  different
\nareas or  engaged in  different vacations.”  Even though the
\nabove Directive\t Principle may not be enforceable as such by
\nvirtue of Article 37 of the Constitution of India, it may be
\nrelied upon  by the  petitioners to show that in the instant
\ncase they  have been subjected to hostile discrimination. It
\nis urged that the State cannot deny at least the minimum pay
\nin the\tpay scales of regularly employed workmen even though
\nthe Government\tmay not\t be  compelled\tto  extend  all\t the
\nbenefits enjoyed by regularly recruited employees. We are of
\nthe view that such denial amounts to exploitation of labour.
\nThe  Government\t  cannot  take\tadvantage  of  its  dominant
\nposition, and  compel any  worker to  work even\t as a casual
\nlabourer on  starving wages.  It  may  be  that\t the  casual
\nlabourer has  agreed to\t work on such low wages. That he has
\ndone because  he has no other choice. It is poverty that has
\ndriven him  to that  State. The Government should be a model
\nemployer. We  are of  the view\tthat on the facts and in the
\ncircumstances of  this case  the classification of employees
\ninto regularly\trecruited employees and casual employees for
\nthe purpose  of paying\tless than the minimum pay payable to
\nemployees in  the corresponding\t regular cadres particularly
\nin the\tlowest rungs  of the department where the pay scales
\nare the lowest is not tenable. The further classification of
\ncasual labourers  into three categories namely (i) those who
\nhave not  completed 720 days of service; (ii) those who have
\ncompleted 720 days of service and not completed 1200 days of
\nservice and  (iii) those  who have  completed more than 1200
\ndays of service for purpose of payment of different rates of
\nwages  is   equally   untenable.   There   is\tclearly\t  no
\njustification  for   doing  so.\t Such  a  classification  is
\nviolative of  Articles 14  and 16 of the Constitution. It is
\nalso opposed to the spirit of Article 7 of the International
\nCovenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 which
\nexhorts all  States parties  to ensure\tfair wages and equal
\nwages for equal work. We feel that there is substance in the
\ncontention of the petitioners
\n609<\/span>
\n     In Dhirendra  Chamoli and\tAnother v.  State  of  U.P.,<\/a>
\n[1986] 1  SCC 637 this Court has taken almost a similar view
\nwith regard  to the  employees working\tin the\tNehru  Yuvak
\nKendras who were considered to be performing the same duties
\nas Class  IV employees.\t We accordingly\t direct the Union of
\nIndia and  the other respondents to pay wages to the workmen
\nwho are\t employed  as  casual  labourers  belonging  to\t the
\nseveral categories  of employees  referred to  above in\t the
\nPostal and  Telegraphs Department at the rates equivalent to
\nthe minimum  pay in the pay scales of the regularly employed
\nworkers\t in   the  corresponding   cadres  but\twithout\t any
\nincrements with\t effect from  5th of February, 1986 on which
\ndate the  first of  the above  two petitions,  namely,\tWrit
\nPetition No.  302 of  1986 was\tfiled. The  petitioners\t are
\nentitled  to  corresponding  Dearness  Allowance  and  Addl.
\nDearness Allowance,  if any, payable thereon. Whatever other
\nbenefits which are now being enjoyed by the casual labourers
\nshall continue to be extended to them.\n<\/p>\n
     India is a socialist republic. It implies the existence
\nof certain  important obligations  which the  State  has  to
\ndischarge. The\tright to  work, the  right to free choice of
\nemployment, the\t right to  just and favourable conditions of
\nwork, the  right to  protection\t against  unemployment,\t the
\nright  of  every  one  who  works  to  just  and  favourable
\nremuneration ensuring  a decent\t living for  himself and for
\nfamily, the right of every one without discrimination of any
\nkind to\t equal pay  for\t equal\twork,  the  right  to  rest,
\nleisure, reasonable limitation on working hours and periodic
\nholidays with  pay, the\t right to form trade unions. and the
\nright to  join trade unions of one’s choice and the right to
\nsecurity of  work are  some of\tthe rights  which have to be
\nensured by  appropriate legislative  and executive measures.
\nIt  is\ttrue  that  all\t these\trights\tcannot\tbe  extended
\nsimultaneously. But they do indicate the socialist goal. The
\ndegree of  achievement in  this direction  depends upon\t the
\neconomic resources, willingness of the people to produce and
\nmore than  all the  existence of industrial peace throughout
\nthe country.  Of those\trights the  question of\t security of
\nwork is\t of utmost importance. If a person does not have the
\nfeeling that  he  belongs  to  an  organization\t engaged  in
\nproduction he  will not\t put  forward  his  best  effort  to
\nproduce more.  That sense  of belonging\t arises only when he
\nfeels that  he will not be turned out of employment the next
\nday at\tthe whim of the management. It is for this reason it
\nis being  repeatedly observed  by those who are in charge of
\neconomic affairs  of the countries in different parts of the
\nworld that  as far  as possible\t security of  work should be
\nassured to  the employees so that they may contribute to the
\nmaximisation of production. It is again for this reason that
\nmanagements and the Government agencies in particular should
\nnot allow
\n610<\/span>
\nworkers to remain as casual labourers or temporary employees
\nfor an\tunreasonably long  period  of  time,  where  is\t any
\njustification to  keep persons as casual labourers for years
\nas is being done in the Postal and Telegraphs Department? Is
\nit  for\t  paying  them\tlower  wages?  Then  it\t amounts  to
\nexploitation of\t labour. Is  it because you do not know that
\nthere is  enough work  for the\tworkers?  It  cannot  be  so
\nbecause there is so much of development to be carried out in
\nthe communications  department that  you need  more workers.
\nThe  employees\t belonging  to\t skilled,  semi-skilled\t and
\nunskilled classes  can be  shifted from\t one  department  to
\nanother even  if there\tis no  work to\tbe done\t in a  given
\nplace. Administrators  should realise  that  if\t any  worker
\nremains idle  on any  day, the country loses the wealth that
\nhe would  have produced\t during that day. Our wage structure
\nis such\t that a\t worker is  always paid\t less than  what  he
\nproduces. So  why allow\t people to  remain idle? Anyway they
\nhave got  to be\t fed and  clothed. Therefore,  why don’t  we
\nprovide them with work? There are several types of work such
\nas  road   making,  railway  construction,  house  building,
\nirrigation projects,  communications etc.  which have  to be
\nundertaken on  a large\tscale. Development in these types of
\nactivities (even  though they  do not  involve much  foreign
\nexchange) is  not keeping pace with the needs of society. We
\nare saying  all this  only to make the people understand the
\nneed for better management of man power (which is a decaying
\nasset) the  non-utilisation of which leads to the inevitable
\nloss of\t valuable  human  resources.  Let  us  remember\t the
\nslogan: “Produce  or Perish”.  It is not an empty slogan. We
\nfail to\t produce more  at our  own peril. It is against this
\nbackground that\t we say that non-regularisation of temporary
\nemployees or  casual labour  for a long period is not a wise
\npolicy. We,  therefore, direct\tthe respondents to prepare a
\nscheme on  a rational basis for absorbing as far as possible
\nthe casual  labourers who have been continuously working for
\nmore than one year in the Posts and Telegraphs Department.\n<\/p>\n
     The arrears of wages payable to the casual labourers in
\naccordance with\t this order shall be paid within four months
\nfrom today.  The respondents  shall  prepare  a\t scheme\t for
\nabsorbing the  casual labourers,  as directed  above, within
\neight months from today.\n<\/p>\n
     These petitioners are accordingly disposed of.\n<\/p>\n
N.P.V.\t\t\t\t      Petitions disposed of.\n611<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 Equivalent citations: 1987 AIR 2342, 1988 SCR (1) 598 Author: E Venkataramiah Bench: Venkataramiah, E.S. (J) PETITIONER: DAILY RATED CASUAL LABOUR EMPLOYEDUNDER P & T DEPARTMENT THR Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS DATE OF […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-138946","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nDaily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"23 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987\",\"datePublished\":\"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\"},\"wordCount\":3213,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\",\"name\":\"Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"23 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987","datePublished":"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987"},"wordCount":3213,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987","name":"Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1987-10-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-01T08:41:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daily-rated-casual-labour-vs-union-of-india-others-on-27-october-1987#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Daily Rated Casual Labour … vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138946","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=138946"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138946\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=138946"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=138946"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=138946"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}