SHARMA, J.— A short controversy is involved in this writ petition and it is as to whether the petitioners and other similarly situated persons are entitled for payment of bonus or not?

(2) It will appear from the perusal of Annexure-1 which is a certified copy of orders passed in two writ petitions Nos. 410/1989 and 424/1989 decided by this Court on 20.7.1990, that this court had allowed both the writ petitions and had made the following order: —

"I hereby allow both the writ petitions only to the limited extent that both the petitioners shall be entitled to the minimum pay in the scale of posts on which each of them was working and shall also be entitled to allowances according to rules. So far as the prayer that each of them should be regularised in the pay scale, learned counsel does not press it. Costs made easy."

(3) It was also directed by this court that if any amount is payable as a result of that order to the petitioners shall be only payable from 25th January 1989 the date on which the writ petitions were filed. The amount shall be paid as soon as possible but in no case later than three months.

(4) It is the case of the petitioners that they have been denied bonus which has been granted to other employees of the State Government whether they are temporary or permanent and who had completed atleast six months continuous service till the year 1989-90 under an order of the Government of Rajasthan, Finance (Gr.2) Department under order No.F.l (65) FD (Gr.2)/86 dated 24th September 1990 and in the subject was "Grant of adhoc bonus to employees for the year 1989-90". This facility has been denied to the petitioners on the ground that they are daily rated employees and casual employees and their case according to the department was governed by Clause (e) of the aforesaid Government order.

(5) Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents to the writ petition and it will appear from the perusal of the reply that each of the petitioner was appointed on daily wages. In the last part of para 6 of the reply, it has been stated that this court in its order dated 26th July 1990 had allowed only for payment of minimum of pay scale of the post and not allowed for regularisation of services in the pay scale. Thus, the petitioners continued to be casual workers, and the scheme under which the petitioners were engaged was a temporary plan, scheme, implemented through the Panchayat Samiti out of grant-in-aid funds. The engagement of the petitioners by the Panchayat Samiti under this temporary scheme is therefore, only of the nature of casual worker, and therefore, they are not entitled for bonus as per the provisions of the Finance Department Order dated 24th September 1990.

(6) It will be proper to extract the relevant part of the circular of the Finance Department dated 24th September 1990 and it is as under : —

"The matter relating to grant of adhoc bonus for the financial year 1989-90 to State Government employees has been considered and the Governor has been pleased to order that pending evolution of a formula, State Government employees may be granted adhoc bonus equivalent to 27 days emoluments for the financial year 1989-90 on the following terms and conditions :

(i) Only those employees who were in service on 31.3.1990 drawing emoluments upto Rs. 2,500/- per month in pre-revised/or revised scale of pay on 31.3.1990 and have rendered at least six months of continuous service during the year 1989-90 will be eligible for adhoc bonus under these orders. Pro-rata payment will be admissible to the eligible employees for periods of continuous service during the year ranging from six months to a full year, the eligibility period being taken in terms of number of months of service (rounded to the nearest number of months).

(7) There are classifications and we are presently concerned with Clause (e) of the aforesaid classifications which reads as under : —

"Employees engaged on part-time basis or at a daily wage will not be eligible for adhoc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document