Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Indra Devi vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 October, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15244/2021
Smt. Indra Devi W/o Late Bhorulal, Aged About 45 Years, B/c
Jatav (S.c), R/o Jatav Basti, Karauli. Presently Working As Cook
In Govt. Savitri Bai Phule Girls Hostel, Karauli.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Social Welfare
Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Social Welfare Department, Jaipur.
3. The Assistant Director, Social Welfare Department,
Karauli.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahipaal Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
27/10/2021
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.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the reliefs as mentioned
in the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that her
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:
(Downloaded on 28/10/2021 at 09:24:07 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-15244/2021]
"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
fact 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' Page 101101 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 been titled to draw wages at the minimum of
the pay-scale (at the lowest grade, in the regular
payscale), extended to regular employees, holding the
same post."
(Downloaded on 28/10/2021 at 09:24:07 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-15244/2021]
Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with
direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the
petitioner in terms of aforesaid precedent law as extracted
hereinabove. The needful be done within a period of 60 days from
today.
Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
277-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
