Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Iliyas Khan vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 August, 2021

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10995/2021

1. Iliyas Khan S/o Sidik Khan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Matuo Ki Dhani, Gram Panchayat Swami Ka Ganv, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.).

2. Dilvar Khan S/o Jusab Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Joranada, Sheo, Gram Panchayat Balai, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Joranada)

3. Rincharam S/o Sh. Tila Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Modha Ka Tala, Gram Panchayat Nagarda, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Nagrada)

4. Idha S/o Hasam Khan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Rajadon Ki Dhani, Poshal, Madha Ka Tala, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Madha Ka Tala)

5. Mirhasan S/o Kamal Khan, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Sharanathiyo Ka Vas, Gram Panchayat Negarda, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Bhanwarisar Negarda)

6. Deva Ram S/o Sh. Prabhu Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Sura Jagir, Sura Jageer, Sura, Gram Panchayat Sura Charnan, Panchayat Samiti Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

7. Bhera Ram S/o Sh. Shera Ram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Shiv Bhakari, Nand, Gram Panchayat Nand, Panchayat Samiti Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Nand)

8. Gopal Singh S/o Sh. Ratandan, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Sura Charanan, Sura, Gram Panchayat Sura Charanan, Panchayat Samiti Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Sura Jagir)

9. Khima Ram S/o Sh. Aidan Ram, Aged About 74 Years, R/o Khardiya, Gram Panchayat Mangta, Panchayat Samiti Dhoromana, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Khardia)

10. Tikma Ram S/o Sh. Bhartha Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Meghwalo Ki Dhani, Nihalniyo Ka Toba, Gangala, Gram Panchayat Gangala, Panchayat Samiti Ramsar, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Meghwalo Ki Dhani, Nihalniyo Ka Toba, Gangaala Me Kua)

11. Lunga S/o Kamal, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Khariya Rathoran, Gram Panchayat Khariya Rathoran, Panchayat

(2 of 5) [CW-10995/2021]

Samiti Ramsar, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Khariya Rathoran)

12. Kamrdin S/o Rana, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Nohadi Basti, Khariya Rathoran, Gram Panchayat Charhi, Panchayat Samiti Ramsar, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Charhi)

13. Hari Singh S/o Sh. Ridmal Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Rani Gaon, Gram Panchayat Sanau, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Rajoniyo Ka Tala)

14. Kamal Singh S/o Sh. Mal Singh, Aged About 65 Years, R/o House No. 25, Soda Ki Dhani, Dungarpura, Gram Panchayat Sanau, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Dungarpura Tala)

15. Basant Singh S/o Sh. Praag Singh, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Dhok, Gram Panchayat Dhok, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Dhok)

16. Ali Mohammad S/o Hakam, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Parariya, Gram Panchayat Uparala, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Uparala)

17. Kumaradin S/o Chinshar Khan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Goliyar, Gram Panchayat Sanau, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Goliyar Tala)

18. Banka Ram S/o Sh. Shri Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Bijrad, Gram Panchayat Bijrad, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Khotho Ka Tala)

19. Goga Ram S/o Sh. Amba Ram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Shivpura, Gram Panchayat Goliyar, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Chopani Bhilo Ka Tala)

20. Jetha Ram S/o Sh. Adu Ram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Ratanpura, Gram Panchayat Konra, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Ratanpura)

21. Kistura Ram S/o Sh. Joga Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Shivpura, Gram Panchayat Goliyar, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Shivpura Goliyar)

22. Rosan S/o Mohammad Khan, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Konra, Gram Panchayat Konra, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Konra)

23. Sarup Singh S/o Sh. Kump Singh, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Judiya, Gram Panchayat Jhankali, Panchayat Samiti

(3 of 5) [CW-10995/2021]

Gadraroad, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Judiya)

24. Bhanwar Lal S/o Sh. Vagta Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/ o Mehrangarh, Gram Panchayat Konra, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Mehrangarh)

25. Shakar Khan S/o Salya Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Konra, Gram Panchayat Konra, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer (Raj.).

26. Mirhasan S/o Gulam Mustafa, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Bissasar, Gram Panchayat Bissasar, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Bissasar)

27. Gani Khan S/o Janu Khan, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Sherpura, Bamrala, Gram Panchayat Sherpura, Panchayat Samiti Sedwa, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Sherpura)

28. Khamisha S/o Janu Khan, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Sherpura, Bamrala, Gram Panchayat Sherpura, Panchayat Samiti Sedwa, District Barmer (Raj.). (Jjy Sherpura)

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary-Cum-

Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. District Collector, Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

6. Superintending Engineer, Department Of Public Health Engineering (Phed), Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

7. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District Barmer (Raj.).

8. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

9. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Dhoromana, District Barmer (Raj.).

10. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramsar,

(4 of 5) [CW-10995/2021]

District Barmer (Raj.).

11. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Chohtan, District Barmer (Raj.).

12. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Gadraroad, District Barmer (Raj.).

13. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Dhanau, District Barmer (Raj.).

14. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sedwa, District Barmer (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pardeep Singh for Mr. HS Sidhu

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

18/08/2021

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

(5 of 5) [CW-10995/2021]

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 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.