Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Laxmi Narayan Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 October, 2021

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15323/2021

1. Laxmi Narayan Meena S/o Kalu Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Chhaprari, Achrol, Jaipur, District Jaipur

2. Mohan Lal Yadav S/o Bheru Ram Yadav, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Ward No 7, Sundarpura, Veelpur, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

3. Arjun Lal S/o Nathuram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Shaira Wali Dhani, Sabrampura, Kishanpura, District Jaipur.

4. Babu Lal Saini S/o Nanu Ram Saini, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Akhepura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

5. Prabhu Dayal Gurjar S/o Sadhu Ram Gurjar, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Peelwa, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

6. Badri Prasad S/o Ladu Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Dagiya Wali Ki Dhani, Malpura, Mancheri, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

7. Babu Lal Meena S/o Kokal Ram Meena, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Dewal Valo Ki Dhani, Kotda, Bagwada, Daulatpura, District Jaipur.

8. Jagdish Jat S/o Bhagirath Mal Jat, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Murlipura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

9. Kailash Saini S/o Durga Prasad Saini, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Amarsar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

10. Prabhu Dayal Jat S/o Tulsi Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Ward No 01, Kalayanpura, Hanutia, Shahpura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

11. Prabhudayal S/o Bheruram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o 21, Akedadoongar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

12. Mohan Lal Jat S/o Nanda Ram Jat, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Ward No. 3, Bajiyo Ki Dhani, Chak Dhanota, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

13. Kanhaiya Lal Jat S/o Mangal Chand Jat, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Tejpura, Hanuta, Tejpura, District Jaipur.

14. Harsahay S/o Ganpat Ram, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Charta Ka Dher, Dhani Lakhawali, Amarsar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

15. Satyanarayan Sharma S/o Nathu Ram Sharma, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Plot No 14, Rajasthan Hotel Sikar Road, Udaipuriya, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

16. Himmat Singh Gurjar S/o Ganesh Narayan, Aged About 53 Years, R/o 6 Jagannath Vidhayalaya Shetra,jagannathpur, Tehsil Aamer, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

17. Mool Chand Yadav S/o Suva Lal Yadav, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Dhani Hanuman Ji Wali, Village Post Achrol, Tehsil Aamer, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

18. Surendra Kumar Choudhary S/o Sedu Ram Choudhary,

(2 of 6) [CW-15323/2021]

Aged About 49 Years, R/o Hanumanpura With Chak Sevapura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

19. Ramswaroop Jat S/o Prabhati Lal Jat, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Ward No. 07, Dhani Mewa Kalla, Harchandpura, Kanwarpura, Gathwadi, District Jaipur.

20. Narayan Lal Yadav S/o Chanda Ram Roondal, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Roondal, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

21. Mali Ram S/o Mangla Ram Gurjar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Ward No. 04, Mahadevvada Ki Dhani, House No. 73, Arniya, Manoharpura, Lakher, District Jaipur.

22. Kalyan Sahay Gurjar S/o Sohan Lal Gurjar, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Ward No 09, Gujro Ka Mohalla, Balesar, Norangpura, District Jaipur.

23. Babu Lal Saini S/o Narsa Ram Saini, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Ward No 05, Maliyo Ka Mohalla, Shiv Mandir Ke Pass, Purawala, Tehsil Virat Nagar, District Jaipur.

24. Shivram Gurjar S/o Surjaram Gurjar, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Joda Ki Dhani, Behajar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

25. Mangilal S/o Balu Ram Choudhary, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Bijarniyo Ki Dhani, Baseri, Dhankiya, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

26. Pradhan Jat S/o Chittarmal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o 79,sukhababa Ki Dhani, Gram Kanwar Ka Bass, Post Durjniyawas, Kalwad, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

27. Ram Lal Dadarwal S/o Kala Ram, Aged About 52 Years, R/ o 55,lakhawali Dhani, Chak Ramsar, District Jaipur.

28. Bhairu Sahay S/o Nanag Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Ward No 10, Awana Ki Dhani, Tewadi,tehsil Viratnagar, Teori, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

29. Mangal Chand S/o Ramu Ram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Gora Ki Dhani, Maheshwas Khurd Rojda, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

30. Harinarayan Choudhary S/o Ramji Lal Choudhary, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Jaitpura, Rojda, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

31. Papu Lal Yadav S/o Jagan Nath Yadav, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ward No 09, Gogla Wali Dhani, Teori, Tehsil Viratnagar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

32. Ramswaroop Jat S/o Harnath Jat, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Pooniya Ki Dhani Pachar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

33. Babu Lal Jat S/o Sahdev, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Chak Boyatwala, Kishanpura Jaipur, District Jaipur .

34. Ram Niwas Jat S/o Hanuman Sahay, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Tiwadi Wala Khema, Baba Ki Dhani, Dhankiya, Jotwara, District Jaipur.

35. Nanu Ram Sharma S/o Vijay Lal Sharma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Kandera Ki Dhani, Bhoodarpura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

36. Rajesh Kumar Lamba S/o Onkar Mal Jat, Aged About 54

(3 of 6) [CW-15323/2021]

Years, R/o 155 Lamba Ki Dhani, Gram Neemra Post Neemera Vaya Jhotwara, Neemera, District Jaipur.

37. Mohan Lal Moray S/o Prabhat Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 276 Regro Ka Mohalla, Kalwar, Kalwar, District Jaipur.

38. Sohan La Kumawat S/o Ram Lal, Aged About 59 Years, R/ o Gajadharpura, Sarna Chor, District Jaipur.

39. Mali Ram Regar S/o Gopal Lal Regar, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Madha Ki Dhani, Mehar, Viratnagar, District Jaipur.

40. Suraj Narayan Yadav S/o Hanuam Sahaym, Aged About 49 Years, R/o 75,hadman Sarpanch Ki Dhani, Dhankiya, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

41. Ramprasad Saini S/o Chitarmal Saini, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Maliwada, Kalwar, District Jaipur.

42. Ramprakash Sharma S/o Ramnarayan Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Dhani Badali, Mansarampura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

43. Gyarasi Lal Sharma S/o Madan Lal Sharma, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Nathlalpura, Neemra, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

44. Rameshwar Prasad Jat S/o Sukha Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Ramsukh Baba Ki Dhani, Neembera, Jotwara, District Jaipur.

45. Kailash Chand Choudhary S/o Sharwan Lal Choudhary, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Ward No 06, Jato Ka Bass, Village Ramsinghpura, Post Begas, Tehsil Bagru, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

46. Sharwan Lal Yadav S/o Suva Lal, Aged About 64 Years, R/ o Beed Ki Dhani, Ramsinghpura, Begas, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

47. Gopal Singh S/o Badri Singh, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Ward No. 04, Dudhi Aamloda, Devnarayan Mandir Ke Pass Aamloda, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

48. Babu Lal Kumawat S/o Anandi Lal Kumawat, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Aanandi Lal Kumawat Ki Dhani, Naradpura, Jalsoo, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

49. Ramniwas Sharma S/o Harinarayan Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Chak Mojya, Laxmipura, Chak Mauja, Mundia Rampura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

50. Gopal Lal Jat S/o Chanda Ram Jat, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Munia Rampura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

51. Bhanwar Lal Jat S/o Shyola Ram Jat, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Pindelai, Bawariyo Ki Dhani, Manchwa, Jaipur, Distric Jaipur.

52. Chhitar Mal Jat S/o Mahadev Jhajra, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Jhajro Ki Dhani Lalpura, Pachar, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

53. Bhawani Singh S/o Kalyan Singh, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Nathawat Krishi Farm, Maehswas Kalla, Rojda, Jaiur, District Jaipur.

54. Devi Sahay Saini S/o Kalu Ram Saini, Aged About 43

(4 of 6) [CW-15323/2021]

Years, R/o Ward No 12, Maliyo Ka Mohalla, Biyawas, Tehsil Viratnagar, District Jaipur.

55. Amar Singh Shekhawat S/o Dhir Singh, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ward No. 08, Beelwadi, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

56. Ramniwas S/o Ghasi Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Ghasi Ram Bagda Ki Dhani, Kishanpura, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

57. Sharwan Lal Ghasal S/o Uda Ram, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ghaslo Ki Dhani, Sherawatpura, Mandota, Jaipur, District Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan

2. Director, Department Of Agriculture, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

                                                                    ----Respondents



For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla
For Respondent(s)            :

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

28/10/2021

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 petitioners have 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 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

(5 of 6) [CW-15323/2021]

[(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 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 been titled 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

(6 of 6) [CW-15323/2021]

grade, in the regular pay scale), extended to regular employees, holding the same post."

Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with

direction to the respondents to consider 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.