Rajendra Panwar And Another ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 3852 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1238 of 2021


Rajendra Panwar and another                             .......... Petitioners

                                   Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                  ............ Respondents


Mr. Hem Chandra Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Anjali Bhargawa, Additional Chief Standing Counsel with Mr. Hargovind
Pant, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents.


                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Petitioners claim that they are working as daily wagers in the respondents department, but they are not been paid minimum pay scale. Hence, the petition.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the controversy has already been resolved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.1486-1487 of 2020, Uttaranchal Van Shramik Sangh, Ranibagh etc. vs. the State of Uttarakhand and others etc. He would submit that liberty may be given to the petitioners to make a fresh representation to the respondents within a period of 15 days from today with the further directions to the respondents department to take decision on the representation within the given time.

4. Learned State counsel gives a statement that in case, such a representation is made by the petitioners, a decision will be taken on it within a period of one month from the receipt of the representation.

5. The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel.

6. The writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the respondents within a period of 15 days from today with further directions to the respondents that upon such representation having been made, that shall be decided within a period of one month thereafter.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 23.09.2021 Sanjay