Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Soma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:39668) on 24 September, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:39668]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15724/2024

1.       Soma Ram S/o Ajba Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
         Makawal, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
2.       Jetha Ram S/o Deva Ram, Aged About 63 Years, R/o
         Mandwariya, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
3.       Narendra Singh S/o Kesar Singh, Aged About 42 Years,
         R/o Bherugadh, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
4.       Mota Ram S/o Veesa Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Goliya, Dhanari, Tehsil-Pindwara, District-Sirohi.
5.       Dunga Ram S/o Kesaji, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Manora,
         Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
6.       Harish Kumar S/o Geena Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
         Naijameen , Dhanari, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
7.       Bhera Ram S/o Musna Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
         Bhimana, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
8.       Heeram S/o Kesa Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
         Neembaj, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
9.       Devi Singh S/o Dharam Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
         Tarungi, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
10.      Shantilal S/o Narsaram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
         Selwada, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
11.      Malaram     S/o    Savaram,         Aged       About     48   Years, R/o
         Varman, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
12.      Gokulram S/o Poonmaram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
         Gulabganj, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
13.      Vajaram S/o Samartha Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o
         Pitapura(M), Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
14.      Dinesh Kumar S/o Pratap Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Kesua, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
15.      Lavji Ram S/o Hansa Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
         Magrivada, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
16.      Heera Ram S/o Rasee Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
         Dak, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
17.      Nathu Ram S/o Vajaram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Hadmatiya, Anadra, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
18.      Mohan Lal S/o Moti Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Marol,


                      (Downloaded on 24/09/2024 at 09:09:09 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:39668]                    (2 of 6)                    [CW-15724/2024]


         Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
19.      Kalu Ram S/o Vana Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Bhamra, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
20.      Shankarlal S/o Raghunath, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
         Mandvada, Khalsa, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
21.      Vela Ram S/o Chena Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o
         Udawariya, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
22.      Ganesh Ram S/o Darja Ram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
         Isra, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
23.      Prartap Ram S/o Bhura Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
         Jolpur, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
24.      Bhaga Ram S/o Agra Ram, Aged About 57 Years, R/o
         Dattani, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
25.      Ramesh Kumar S/o Narayanlal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
         Panchdeval, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
26.      Shambhu Singh S/o Dhan Singh, Aged About 54 Years,
         R/o Ker, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
27.      Mahendra Kumar S/o Jesa Ram, Aged About 28 Years,
         R/o Bhatana, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
28.      Talsa Ram S/o Ala Ram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
         Chadwal, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
29.      Anil Kumar S/o Tulsi Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
         Chadwal, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
30.      Muka Ram S/o Choga Ji, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Noon,
         Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
31.      Gatta Ram S/o Khasa Ji, Aged About 57 Years, R/o
         Phoogni, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
32.      Bhera Ram S/o Bharat Ji, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
         Haliwada, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
33.      Bhera Ram S/o Ugra Ji, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Sirodki,
         Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
34.      Dwarka Das S/o Lal Das, Aged About 56 Years, R/o
         Madiya, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
35.      Ransa Ram S/o Karma Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
         Aamli, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
36.      Bhata Ram S/o Mega Ji, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Thandi
         Veri, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.


                      (Downloaded on 24/09/2024 at 09:09:09 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:39668]                    (3 of 6)                    [CW-15724/2024]


37.      Dilip Kumar S/o Sava Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
         Kacholi, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
38.      Bharat Kumar S/o Babulal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Bhootgaon, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
39.      Gulanchandra Mali S/o Velaram, Aged About 59 Years,
         R/o Vatera, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
40.      Makna Ram S/o Dhanaji, Aged About 64 Years, R/o
         Jamotra, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
41.      Khangarmal S/o Chaganlal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
         Lunol, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
42.      Hansa Ram S/o Mangla Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
         Satapura, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
43.      Tej Singh S/o Lal Singh, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Achpura, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
44.      Kamla Ram S/o Sona Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
         Panch Deval, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
45.      Bhopa Ram S/o Chuna Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Guda, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
46.      Shailpuri S/o Ompuri, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Navara,
         Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
47.      Savaram S/o Leelaji, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Phoola Bai
         Kheda, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
48.      Bhera Ram S/o Bhoota Ram, Aged About 57 Years, R/o
         Mandvada Dev, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
49.      Kantilal S/o Goda Ram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
         Posintra, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
50.      Suresh Das S/o Santok Das, Aged About 47 Years, Re/o
         Navara, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi.
51.      Jodha Ram S/o Mafa Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
         Malipura, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
52.      Madhuram Sargara S/o Choga Ram, Aged About 36 Years,
         R/o Sivera, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
53.      Ishwar Seni S/o Nathuram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
         Keshavganj, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi.
54.      Samrtha Ram S/o Bharka Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
         Sanwada(S), Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
55.      Shankar Singh S/o Chhog Singh, Aged About 57 Years,


                      (Downloaded on 24/09/2024 at 09:09:09 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:39668]                        (4 of 6)                         [CW-15724/2024]


         R/o Thal, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
56.      Raju Ram S/o Chunni Lal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
         Rohua, Tehsil Reodar, District Sirohi.
57.      Pratap Ram S/o Diita Ji, Aged About 58 Years, R/o
         Nagpura, Achpura, District Sirohi.
                                                                          ----Petitioners
                                         Versus
1.       State       Of      Rajasthan,           Through             Secretary,   Rural
         Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
2.       Secretary,        Public       Health        Engineering          Department,
         Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
3.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sirohi, District
         Sirohi (Raj.).
4.       The     Superintending           Engineer,        Department         Of   Public
         Health Engineering Department (Phed), Sirohi, District
         Sirohi.
                                                                        ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. Harshit Yadav



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

24/09/2024

1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:-

"A. The respondents may be directed to pay wages at the minimum of pay scale (at the lowest grade, in the regular pay scale), extended to regular employees, holding the same post in compliance of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

B. The respondents may be directed to pay the arrear of difference amount which is paid less to the petitioners w.e.f. date of their appointment.

C. The respondents may be directed to pay monthly salary of the petitioners through cheques/ online payment/

[2024:RJ-JD:39668] (5 of 6) [CW-15724/2024]

RTGS/ Online Banking System and restrained to make cash payment to the petitioners.

D. The respondents may be directed to regularize the services of the petitioners w.e.f. the completion of their 10 years of service and they may be paid all consequential benefits accordingly".

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 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' 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

[2024:RJ-JD:39668] (6 of 6) [CW-15724/2024]

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 precedent law as extracted

hereinabove. The needful be done within a period of 60 days from

today.

4. The order has been passed on the submissions made in the

petition, the respondents would be free to examine the veracity of

the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the

averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioners

would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 27-SanjayS/-