Chhagan Lal Gameti vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9061 Raj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 9061 Raj
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Chhagan Lal Gameti vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 April, 2021

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4706/2021

1. Chhagan Lal Gameti S/o Shri Kala Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Napadevi Post Ogna Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Kateriya Falla Village Napadevi Panchayat Samiti Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260723401

2. Chanda Kumhar D/o Ram Prashad W/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Gogla District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Kheda Falla (Amarpura) Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260708104

3. Vidya Gadari D/o Ram Lal W/o Manish Kumar Gadari, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Bida Post Jhadol Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Jhotana Gram Panchayat Kochala Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260708704

4. Laxman Lal Pargi S/o Shri Bhagwati All, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Netwali Post Godana, Panchayat Samiti Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Netawali, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260727401

5. Leela Devi W/o Naval Chand Paragi, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Khara Falla Luniyara Post Kovyari Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Khara Falla Luniyara, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08261304603

6. Babudi Devi W/o Dinesh Patela, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Bari Post Magaradev, Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Gadamal Falla Village Bari, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260706102

7. Geeta Devi W/o Ramesh Kumar Meena, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Kharada Post Ogna, Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi /

(2 of 4) [CW-4706/2021]

Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Kasotiya Falla Village Kada, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260722202

8. Bhagli Devi W/o Kishan Lal Khokaria, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Chechalia Post Borana, Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Danda Vella Gaon Chechalia, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260707302

9. Shankar Lal Parmar S/o Kalu Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kolar Post Ogna, Tehsil Jhadol (Ph) District Udaipur At Present Posted As A Shiksha Karmi / Teacher At Maa Badi Prathmik Shiksha Cendra Pada Fallan Village Kolar, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur U-Dies Code 08260725502

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Tribal Area Development Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Elementary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Commissioner, Tribal Area Development Department, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

4. Additional Secretary, Tribal Area Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Udaipur.

5. Director, Swach Pariyojana, Tribal Area, Udaipur (Raj.)

6. District Project Officer, Swach Pariyojana, District Udaipur (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramdev Potalia For Respondent(s) :

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Judgment

08/04/2021

(3 of 4) [CW-4706/2021]

1. This writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking reliefs

as indicated in the writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that their

representation may be considered by the respondents in light of

the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of

State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Jagjit Singh & Ors. reported in[(2017) 1

Supreme Court Cases 148]. The relevant portion of the judgment

reads as under:

"60. Having traversed the legal parameters with reference to the application of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', in relation to temporary employees (daily-wage employees, ad-hoc appointees, employees appointed on casual basis, contractual employees and the like), the sole factor or that requires our determination is, whether the concerned employees (before this Court), were rendering similar duties and responsibilities, as were being discharged by regular employees, holding the same/corresponding posts. This exercise would require the application of the parameters of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' summarized by us in paragraph 42 above. However, insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, it is not difficult for us to record the factual position. We say so, because it was fairly acknowledged by the learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, that all the temporary employees in the present bunch of appeals, were appointed against posts which were also available in the regular cadre/establishment. It was also accepted, that during the course of their employment, the concerned temporary employees were being randomly deputed to discharge duties and responsibilities, which at some point in time, were assigned to regular employees. Likewise, regular employees holding substantive posts, were also posted to discharge the same work, which was assigned to temporary employees, from time to time. There is, therefore, no room for any doubt, that the duties and responsibilities discharged by the temporary employees in the present set of appeals, were the same as were being discharged by regular employees. It is not the case of the appellants, that the respondent-employees did not possess the qualifications prescribed for appointment on regular basis. Furthermore, it is not the case of the State, that any of the temporary employees would not be entitled to pay parity, on any of the principles summarized by us in paragraph 42 hereinabove. There can be no doubt, that the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would be applicable to all the concerned temporary employees, so as to vest in them the right to claim wages, at par with the minimum of

(4 of 4) [CW-4706/2021]

the pay-scale of regularly engaged Government employees, holding the same post.

61. In view of the position expressed by us in the foregoing paragraph, we have no hesitation in holding, that all the concerned temporary employees, in the present bunch of cases, would be entitled to draw wages at the minimum of the pay-scale (- at the lowest grade, in the regular pay- scale), extended to regular employees, holding the same post."

3. Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with

direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the

petitioners in terms of aforesaid judgment. The needful be done

within a period of 60 days from today.