1999 Supreme(Raj) 20
B.S.CHAUHAN
Anwar Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Advocates Appeared:
M. Mridul, Senior Advocate, with R.N. Upadhyaya, for Petitioner
Judgement Key Points
- The petitioner, a daily wage Class IV employee, was granted equal wages as regularly employed Class IV employees from the date of filing the earlier writ petition (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3906/1990, decided on 6.9.1993), but not regularization. [17019991840001] (!) (!) [17019991840024][17019991840002]
- A successive writ petition seeking reliefs already claimed or which ought to have been claimed in an earlier writ petition is not maintainable, as it is barred by principles akin to res judicata and constructive res judicata. [17019991840005][17019991840006][17019991840007]
- A writ petition under Article 226 is not an appropriate or effective remedy for enforcing a judgment from a previous writ petition. [17019991840005] (!) [17019991840023]
- The proper remedy for enforcing a court's judgment is through contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act within the limitation period, and thereafter under Article 215 of the Constitution within a reasonable time. [17019991840010][17019991840015][17019991840019][17019991840020][17019991840022][17019991840023]
- In contempt jurisdiction, the court can enforce its earlier order, issue necessary directions to ensure compliance, and rectify violations, but cannot modify the original order or issue fresh directions. [17019991840012][17019991840013][17019991840016][17019991840017][17019991840018]
- A party cannot be rendered remediless, but must pursue remedies diligently and in good faith; delay in approaching the court may indicate lack of diligence. [17019991840011][17019991840021]
- Daily wage employees entitled to equal pay are not "similarly situated" to regularly selected employees for claiming benefits like annual grade increments beyond the minimum pay scale. [17019991840003][17019991840004]
Honble CHAUHAN, J.–The instant writ petition has been filed for issuing a direction to the respondents to release the annual grade increments and fix the salary of the petitioner as and when the same fell due and pay him all that became payable on that account alongwith interest @ 18% per annum as and when the same became payable and were not paid to the petitioner, and further to direct the respondents to fix the salary of the petitioner consequent to the aforesaid reliefs and further direction to the respondents to grant other benefits such as leave etc. which are granted to regularly appointed Class IV employees.
(2). The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was initially appointed on daily wages in 1984 alongwith the respondents as Class IV employee. He filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3906/1990 for seeking the relief of regularisation and grant of equal pay for equal work. The said writ petition was decided on 6.9.1993 and the operative part of the order runs as under:-
``On the facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner is not entitled to regularisation, but he is entitled to get equal wages
.... as was being given to regularly
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
