Allowed

Kedar Lal Sen v. Secretary Gramin Vikas and Panch

Rajasthan HC9 Aug 2017CW/6101/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that although the petitioner was appointed as a part-time employee, actual duty performance was full-time. Applying the principle of equal pay for equal work, the Court allowed the application and directed payment of minimum Class-IV pay scale.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner entitled to minimum pay-scale of Class-IV employee from date of appointment; dues within 8 weeks.

Kedar Lal Sen Vs Secretary Gramin Vikas… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil writ petition No. 6101 / 2002

¶3

Kedar Lal Sen S/o Shri Ganpat Lal Sen aged 38 years resident of Gram Budadeet, Teh. Degod, Distt. Kota.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Secretary, Gramin Vikas & Panchayati Raj Deptt., Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

'2. Director, Gramin Vikas & Pan'chayatbRaj Deptt., Secretariat, * "a .-.: "3 i (' ** Jaipur. * * ,$ t'f? i I i Pw I- 3. Chief Executive officer, Zila Parishad, Kota : _gs_ i Ldr? 4. Block e&lornent Officer, Panchayat Sarniti, Sulta.npQr, Distt. ,.,*<A Kota. ., s

¶8

i . 8.2 , . .- '** #* a I, For Petitioner(s) : Mr. .id';@9@aiina"i .. ., i ,$. "6;. I ; <&?' **_v-.;-.-_** %> For Respondent(s) : 'Mr. ti,~jayiG~r;na$hacma, . ,.+ .. ,* -it,I... "" Govt. Counsel s, , .,,., , I. i;..""..& ' <" . ~ ,<, J 3 .":;'? : "?< . 1- e.. $'t, . -: :.+s. &.<$ . .; . + ,."',p'.' , <-<; i s .z,,< $/ _"a2?5.-_* .? **HON'BLE MR. JUSIE:VE.ERE~~/~DR'~~SINGH SIRADHANA** kyy;;:,f&,;;: ",;A&?' -q# S$-.d* a;: - %,@,& o$der - .- b " '"! ,ij$ I" 09/08/2017 9 r; a .' 94 ,* 3 $. a. j " 3. ,$"I - ,.,,

¶9

The petitioner is aggrrie$Sds,f the-a5tion . se .>, of the respondents in not considering his case for regularization as Class-IV Employee t $: < ..::* ?%2:.; A. :,-.: ., "*." < despite of the directions ?suedb:~~hiskourt, and therefore, has * \ .. i i. i '8 instituted the instant writ a@pli'EatiCiii;:pPraying for the following

¶10

'It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that your lordship may kindly be pleased to accept this writ petition and also be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction whereby the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for regularization of his service as Class-iv employee despite of the directions of the Hon'ble Court and in not making the payment of minimum pay scales under the doctrine of equal pay for equal work and paying Rs.2101- per month be deprecated as being illegal, unreasonable and arbitrary and further be pleased to direct the respondent to make the minimum pay scale to the

¶11

petitioner as admissible to the Class-iv employee on the date of reinstatement 18.1.99 and also be pleased to direct the respondents to make the amount admissible to the part time employee instead of Rs.2101- p.m. from the date of termination to date of reinstatement and further be pleased to direct that the arrears be paid together with interest @ 1B0/0 per annum. The cost of the petition may also be awarded in the larger interest of justice.

¶12

Any other relief which deem proper and fit may kindly also be given to the petitioner."

¶13

Shorn off unnecessary details, the essential skeletal material ' Y* ".?, facts necessary for, a,p.preki.at~on ‘z % if the: cogtboversy are that the *. $ ,@-- . petitioner ea?:~ai'~en was employed on 15'b ovmber, 1978. . i' t. -/ It is pleaded. case of the petitioner that he was engaded as part <+%Fi time Class-IV employee. However, he was put to work4for the entire day even for hours Class-IV employee.

¶14

Mr. K.C. on behalf of the petitioner, reitera grounds of the writ application, asse art timeltemporary appointment of t ed since his initial engagement in th he is being paid a meagre amount of han the minimum of the pay scale, to whi

¶15

Referring to of the Apex Court of 3 2- Ts.-&T-s7 --V"w-7 , - - ""j .$.. r. a ifl3.t q the land in the case of State of "Punjab and Others Vs. Jagjif Singh and Others: (2017) 1 SCC 148, learned counsel would urge that the petitioner is entitled for minimum of the pay-scale on the principle of "equal pay for equal work". Reference has also been made to the opinion of this Court in the case of Smt. Santosh Bai & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Anr.: in SBCWP

¶16

No.9337/2010, decided on 6th July, 2017. The claim is also sought to be fortified on the basis of opinion of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiya La1 Vs. The State of Raj. & Anr.: SBCWP No.9572/2006, decided on 15th February, 2017.

¶17

In response to the notice of the writ application, the State~espondents have filed their counter affidavit, raising preliminary objections on the grou.d\qf f3gailabiljty of efficacious and .,,A ;,\ * 3 :${ G <! #/:.I alternative remedy before the forum established under the 3 I..* "% . i ""3 Industrial Diqputes Act, 1947. It is further pleaded'tcaf there is no "-.% 42% sanctioned post of a full time Class-IV employee in tee* R.rimary $ *6u' i .. Schools, and therefore, the ,. _ claim of the petitioner, cannot be sustained.

¶18

Mr. Sanjay Counsel, referring to the opinion this Court in the case of And Health Department) & Ors.: SBQWP No.8162/2012, decided on 22"d E: a 3 I; ;% t 3. i$d&* ,< P_,".: February, 2017, wold$$;e#$~~~$part time employee is *q id.C1 .'W N- SF: P's,. "? .,. entitled to half of the .minim$,q wagqsprescr~bed d $, for a day. a,,. ".'^. .' "'. .'" * _ f * .". '. b4 .-, ~ .<;*s, #LLL>P It is further contendid~~h&the~~~~ex Court of the land in the 'J"--yr-rUy** "\ --- "? case of Secretary ~~~o"?pv,er@en:t"$ % t '., :, v !!a School Education Department, Chennai Vs. R. Govindaswamy & Ors.:(201) 4 SCC 769, relying upon the opinion of the Constitution Bench in the case of State of Karnataka and Ors. Vs. Umadevi and 0rs:AIR 2006 SC 1806, in no uncertain terms observed that part time/ temporary employees in government-run institutions cannot claim parity in salary with regular employees of the Government on the

¶19

principle of 'equal pay for equal work".

¶20

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance and perused the materials available on record as well as gave my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions at Bar.

¶21

Indisputably, the appointment of the petitioner was on parttime basis but the* cerbic3tie issue& by the Principal of the 1 ..% I i ;t*: i Government Primary School, Panchayat amitiultanpur, District ,- s"P \ i. 9. t.,/& Kota, whi,ch has been placed on record as Annexu:re-6 reflects '55 9 that hri Kedar Lal Sen-the petitioner, engaged a+v,61.ass- employee, has been regularlywo,rjkJng as per time table of the Cr>+*aAb < ;, .<d**t$& "$ $T$ "$z%*7{"<,r ". School w.e.f 9.00 AM- , ~~'?";,OGLJPM-..~~.~~~QS work was found C $ 'f.<<&?i'. - I., %2 Il, t " +% 4- .-a , ,,*'t a **,#i?d.d satisfactory. Thus, th0ug.h Zheappo1'ntment3scouched .. . in the name of part-time issued by the concerned Principal the statement and ;i ' ; "4 stand in the reply. The cer$ifi"gate 'has not been questioned or denied. Thus, the r has been working regularly according t chool w.e.f. 9.00 AM to 4.00 PM, stands s e plea to decline the claim of the petitionerq[trp:qqF$q;~@;tpe , -5. Ir pay scale of Class IV B employee, cannot be sustained.

¶22

Though, the Appointing Authority made the order of engagement of the petitioner on part time but in fact, he has been put to work for the entire day according to the School time table w.e.f. 9.00 AM to 4.00 PM. Hence, this act on the part of the State-respondents, a welfare State, cannot be accepted to deny

¶23

the minimum of the pay scale to the petitioner.

¶24

The Apex Court of the land on a survey of earlier opinions in the case of Jagjit Singh (supra), referring to the opinion of the Constitution Bench in the case of Umadevi and Ors. in no uncertain terms observed that concept of equality would not be gpplicable to issues of absorption/regularization. But, the concept was held as applicable, andkv\ias ji,n;deed applied, to the issue of .rtt;5,i%--"* ""~(,$;r pay parity-if thcwbrl(" component was the &me>* In the face of 1%. * Y" ''. it"*> b certificate 'k~n.nexure-6) issued by the Principal'~of/SchooI; the . J A petition;er1s claim cannot be denied in the name o@arT-time . &- d appointment while he has been C9U w> :",,$ p-ut to work for the entire day . . jf is .p.i" ,5& :- - - r, iJ .,,- r w.e.f. 9.00 AM to 4.00 PM.!'. ,

¶25

In the case of been referred to and relied upon by State-respondents, the Coordinate Bench with the issue of parttime Sweepers and

¶26

In the instant casg .*.a+6 ,6-,i$ddjie:$p&tioner1s .! **_Ip@--wIi_** "iw ,+, claim is for the L , .', .y ;.?$&, "g ! :.$,. ,; minimum of the payhda16 d ... &:&. .@CIBSS?;IV ? ,I ielSlployee A rather than for & ., w ." i .q: regularization. ccordinl$~&~~~~~i4~~~a11ication with regard to ". - *, . ,.', -. rrm V? ,o,rr-. claim for minimum of~~kh.ei@ay+salev.oethe .%, i: Class-IV employee; merits acceptance.

¶27

In the result, the writ application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The petitioner is entitled for minimum of the pay-scale of Class-IV employee.

¶28

The State-respondents would do the needful with regard to release of the minimum of the pay-scale of Class-IV employee,

¶29

due to the petitioner since his appointment and the dues due to the petitioner, shall be paid within a period.of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is presented.

¶30

No costs.

¶31

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)].

Kedar Lal Sen v. Secretary Gramin Vikas and Panch

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kedar Lal Sen v. Secretary Gramin Vikas and Panch

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

Similar cases

Smt Shakuntala Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Gafar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Manish Kumar Bairwa and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Ramji Lal Bairwa Vs M D Jctsl and Anr.

Govind Narayan Totla Vs Suresh Kumar Jain

Parwat Lal Mehar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp