Allowed

Shivraj Prasad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Mar 2024WRIA/1852/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Daily wagers serving since 2008 sought minimum of pay scale with 7th Pay Commission benefits on par with regular employees; their representation was rejected. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court set aside the rejecting order and directed payment of minimum of pay scale.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 07.12.2023 set aside; respondents directed to pay petitioners minimum of pay scale paid to similarly situated regular employees performing same work.

Shivraj Prasad and Another Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:21113

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1852 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Shivraj Prasad And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Ateeq Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶7

The petitioners, who are working as a daily wager since the year 2008 are not being paid minimum of pay scale as is being paid to the persons performing the same work in the department. However, they have been denied the benefit of revision of minimum of pay scale on the recommendation of 7th Pay Commission, which is already granted to regular employees. Their representation moved in this regard is also rejected by the impugned order dated 07.12.2023.

¶8

Since the pay scales of regular employees are already enhanced by giving benefit of 7th Pay Commission, therefore, it goes without saying that as per the law settled by the Supreme Court in the cases of Haryana and another. Vs. Tilok Raj and others, (2003) 6 SCC 123. Sabha Shanker Dube. Vs. Divisional Forest Officer and others., (2019) 12 SCC 297 and State of U.P. and others. Vs. Putti Lal, (2006) SCC 337, where it was re-affirmed that temporary employees are entitled to minimum of the pay scales as long as they continue in the service as regards counterparts performing same work, the petitioners are also entitled for minimum of pay scale as is being paid to the persons performing the same work in the department.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the law settled by Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgments.

¶10

In view thereof, the impugned order dated 07.12.2023 cannot stand and is set aside. The respondents are directed to pay minimum of pay scale to the petitioners that is being paid to similarly situated regular employees

¶11

performing the same work.

¶12

The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.3.2024 Ashish

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shivraj Prasad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivraj Prasad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lallan Bharti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Pno.No. 902590207 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Km. Ruchi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Civil Secrt. Lko. and 4 Others

Yogendra Prasad @ Yougendra Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Pradeep Kumar Mishra and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Forest Lko. and 2 Others

Dr. Sunil Kumar and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag I U.P. Lko. and 3 Others