Daily wage employees are entitled to minimum time scale pay under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', regardless of appointment cut-off dates.

ORDER:

CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J.

The present writ petition is filed assailing the action of respondents in not extending minimum time scale of pay to petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.142, Finance (HR.I-Plg. & Policy) Department, dated 27.08.2018, and Proceedings No.C/01/Daily Wages/2022, dated 01.11.2022, issued by the 3^rd respondent, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Petitioners are working in 3^rd respondent College as Suppliers and Cleaners on daily wage basis. They have been paid from 16.09.2013 fixed salary of Rs.10,000/- per month in terms of Memo.No.B1/18028/2012, dated 16.09.2013, issued by the 2^nd respondent. Later, their cases were considered for payment of minimum time scale and the same got fixed as Rs.24.524/- per month from January, 2023 and were paid accordingly for some time. However, from September, 2023, abruptly 3^rd respondent stopped paying the same, but, they were being paid only Rs.15,000/- per month. Petitioners, therefore, immediately made representation, dated 17.10.2023, to 3^rd respondent for extending minimum time scale. As petitioners’ case is not being considered for extending the said benefit, present writ petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri T.Balaji, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though petitioners are working on daily wage basis, they are entitled to be considered for payment of minimum time scale and has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh , (2017) 1 SCC 14 therefore, petitioners cannot be denied the said benefit. He also contended that petitioners are continuing to work in the 3^rd respondent College and even their cases were recommended for regularisation by 3^rd respondent by proceedings, dated 07.06.2013, having extended minimum time scale from January, 2023, they are precluded from abruptly withdrawing the said benefits.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents, opposing the aforesaid submission, 8 while reiterating the contents of the counter-affidavit, contended that as petitioners are working on daily wage basis, they are not entitled for minimum time scale. He further contended that petitioners suppressing their age and service particulars before cut-off date i.e. 25.11.1993, claimed for minimum time scale, and inadvertently without verifying the same, earlier time scale was extended to them and having later realised the mistake committed, the respondents have withdrawn the said benefit. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is any illegality in the same.

6. Perused the record and considered the rival submissions of both parties.

7. Petitioners are all working on daily wage basis in respect of posts with 3^rd respondent College. Even the counter-affidavit also does not dispute the factum of their services, however, it is claimed in the counter-affidavit that the petitioners have been engaged on different dates from 2002 to 2019. Counter-affidavit proceeds on the premise that for the purpose of extending the minimum time scale, one should have been appointed before the cut-off date i.e. 25.11.1993 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.142, dated 27.08.2018. No doubt, aforesaid G.O. stipulates that the Government has extended the time scale to all those full-time/NMR/Daily Wages/Consolidated Pay/Part- time employees/Masalchies, who were appointed before 25.11.1993, but, by considering the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 14 it has been clearly held that even daily wage employees are also to be put on same pedestal on the principle of “equal pay for equal wo