IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
C.S. Dharmadhikari H.H. Kantharia, JJ.
Ahmednagar Zilla Shet Majoor Union others.... Petitioners.
Versus
State of Maharashtra others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 4554 of 1983, decided on 19/20-9-1984.
Advocates appeared :
Smt. Indira Jaising and Anand Grover, for petitioners.
A.V. Savant, A.G., with M.P. Saldanha, A.G.P., for respondents.
2. It is an admitted position that the task rates were fixed for the first time for EGS works by Government Resolution dated 14-2-1975. These task rates were revised by Government Resolution, dated 3-3-1976. Obviously, this was under the scheme known as Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Scheme. Thereafter in the year 1977 the Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act came to be enacted. Government Notification fixing the minimum wage for the agricultural labour in the different zones was issued on 25-10-1978. Though the present enactment was enacted in the year 1977, it was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette on 3-10-1978 and came into force with effect from 26-1-1979. On 22-4-1981 the Planning Department of the Government of Maharashtra fixed the schedule of rates for EGS works. Thereafter on 31-1-1983 the Government of Maharashtra issued a notification revising the minimum rates of wages for agricultural workers. By this notification the minimum rates of wages were fixed zonewise, and the minimum wage for unskilled employees in the Lowest Zone, that is Zone four is fixed at Rs. 6.00 per day. On 18-3-1983 the Government of Maharashtra revised the task rates. It is then the case of the petitioners that in Shrirampur Tahsil in all 242 wrokmen submitted their applications to the Tahsildar to provide them with work. However, these workmen were provided work only for 9 days. They again approached the Collector of Ahmednagar to provide them work, but no work was provided to them, nor was unemployment allowance paid. Therefore, according to the petitioners, their unemployment allowance is wrongfully withheld by the respondents.
3. Smt. Indira Jaising, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended before us that so far as section 7(2)(vii) of the Act, which provides for fixation of uniform schedule of rates for all the zones in the State, with a view to enable the workers only to earn the minimum wage fixed for the lowest zone is concerned, it is wholly discrimina
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.