Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chhitar Kathat vs State And Ors on 22 October, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15820/2017
Chhitar Kathat S/o Shri Kalu Ji, By Caste Kathat Mehrat, R/o
Village Malaji Ka Badiya, Bari Pole, Gram Panchayat Chang,
Tehsil And P.c. Raipur, District Pali Raj..
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Public Health And Engineering, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. Assistant Engineer, Public Health And Engineering
Department, Raipur, District Pali Raj..
3. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Chang, Panchayat Samiti
Raipur, District Pali Raj..
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.D. Ujjawal
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
22/10/2021
1. In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant
caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court,
for the safety of all concerned.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that
the petitioner's representation may be decided 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
(Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 08:57:23 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-15820/2017]
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 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' Page 101
101 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 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."
(Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 08:57:23 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-15820/2017]
3. Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with
direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the
petitioners in terms of aforesaid precedent law as extracted
hereinabove. The needful be done within a period of 60 days from
today.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
100-SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
