1998 Supreme(Raj) 984
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
B.S.Chauhan, J.
Shambhu Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 67 of 1990.
Decided On : 16-03-1998
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Vimal Mathur, Advocate.
A work-charge employee who has been working on a post for a long time is entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale and is further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post, particularly when the post had to be filled-up 100% by direct recruitment and it is not a promotional post.
Headnote:
EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK - WORK-CHARGE EMPLOYEES - RAJASTHAN WORK-CHARGE CODE, 1964 - RULES FOR REGULATING RECRUITMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF THE WORK-CHARGE EMPLOYEES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (B & R), INCLUDING GARDENS, IRRIGATION, WATER WORKS AND AYURVED DEPARTMENTS, 1964 - RAJASTHAN SUBORDINATE OFFICE MINISTERIAL ESTABLISHMENT RULES, 1957 - ARTICLE 39(D) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - A work-charge employee who has been working on a post for a long time is entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale and is further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post, particularly when the post had to be filled-up 100% by direct recruitment and it is not a promotional post.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a work-charge employee, was appointed as a Chowkidar cum Helper in 1980. His designation was changed to Beldar subsequently and in 1984 he was asked to work as a Time-keeper. He claimed that he was entitled to receive the salary in the minimum regular pay scale of the post of Time-keeper and further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale from the date of filing of the writ petition and was further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the post of Time-keeper. The court directed the respondents to pay the arrears etc. and consider his case for regularisation strictly in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of production of the certified copy of the judgment and order.
Issues: Whether a work-charge employee who has been working on a post for a long time is entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale and is further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various judgments of the Supreme Court and the Rajasthan High Court to hold that a work-charge employee who has been working on a post for a long time is entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale and is further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post, particularly when the post had to be filled-up 100% by direct recruitment and it is not a promotional post.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed and the petitioner was held entitled to the pay in the minimum of the regular pay scale from the date of filing of the writ petition and was further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the post of Time-keeper.
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant writ petition has been filed for two reliefs, viz., equal pay for equal work and for considering the regularisation of the petitioner on the post on which he is working for the last ten years.
2. Petitioner was appointed on 24.12.80 as Chowkidar cum Helper and his designation was changed as Beldar subsequently and on 24.12.84 he was asked to work as a Time-keeper with the respondents and claims that he is entitled to receive the salary in the minimum regular pay scale of the post of Time-keeper and further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post.
3. Heard Mr. M.S. Sighvi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vimal Mathur, learned counsel for the respondents.
4. It is evident from various certificates filed with the petition that the petitioner has been asked by the respondents' Authority to work as Time-keeper and his name has been placed in the list of persons to be considered for regularisation on the post of Lower Division Clerk. Mr. Vimal Mathur, learned counsel for the respondents, could not point out as to how the certificates issued by the respondents authorities are not correct. However, his submission is that merely because he has been asked to work as a Time-keeper, he is not entitled to be considered for regularisation on the post of Time-keeper or to be given the pay in the regular pay scale of the said post because he had not been appointed initially as a Time-keeper.
5. The services of the petitioner are governed by the Rules for Regulating Recruitment and Conditions of Service of the Work-charge Employees of the Public Works Department (B & R), including Gardens, Irrigation, Water Works and Ayurved Departments framed in 1964. Rule 4 of the said Rules provides that the appointment on work-charge basis shall be made either by promotion or by direct recruitment and the promotion shall be made in accordance with the rules framed by the Head of the Department. Rule 7 of the said Rules provides for maintaining the Seniority List of each category in each Unit for the purpose of promotion as well as for retrenchment. Rule 34 provides for display of the said Rules in Hindi or English at the conspicuous places and on the Notice Board in the Office.
6. Part II of the Rajasthan Work-charge Code contains the further details of procedure to fill up various vacancies wherein the post of Time-keeper is to be filled up 100% by direct recruitment. The pay scale of the post of Time- Keeper has been given in Part III of the said Code and it is Rs. 950-1680/- though the pay scale of the post of Beldar is Rs. 750-940/- as provided in the said Part. A notification issued on 12.12.1989 under the Rajasthan Subordinate Office Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1957 provides that the incumbent who has completed two years service and has qualified the High School/Secondary School/Praveshika Examination shall be considered by the Selection Committee for appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk on 50% posts lying vacant as on 1.4.1988.
7. Thus, it is clear that the posts are to be filled up by direct recruitment and it is also, admitted that the petitioner has been working on the post of Time-keeper since 1988 though he is being paid the salary of the post of Beldar.
8. This Court has considered this issue while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2424/1992, Hari Ram v. State of Rajasthan decided on 21.1.98, wherein after placing reliance on various judgments of this Court, particularly in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2110/1993, Giriraj Singh v. State of Rajasthan, decided on 8.10.97 and D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 905/1995, Prem Singh Sodha v. State of Rajasthan and held that in such a case if a Beldar is doing the work of Lower Division Clerk/Time-keeper/Driver, he shall be entitled for the salary in the regular pay scale of the post on which he is working and is further entitled to be considered for regularisation on the said post, particularly in view of the fact that the post
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
