Irregular daily wager appointments without advertisement violate Articles 14 & 16; no regularization or reinstatement even with prior equal pay directions; termination upheld as backdoor entries deprecated.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the State of Bihar, Mr. Sushant Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand and Ms. Shreesha Sinha, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 5 and 6.

2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the Office Orders dated 18.07.2002, whereby, the petitioners have been discharged from services and the second prayer is made to pay arrears of salary to the petitioners due since April, 1999.

3. Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner nos.1 to 7 have been appointed on different posts as Night Guard, Assistant, Driver, Typist, Khalasi (Helper), Operator and Assistant respectively in the Bihar State Seed Corporation Limited. He next submits that all the petitioners except petitioner no.7, have preferred a writ petition before this Court being C.W.J.C. No.2185/1991(R) for direction upon the respondents to pay their salary after adopting the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ according to the pay scale fixed by the State Government. He further submits that vide order dated 14.01.1998, this Court was pleased to allow the said writ petition directing the respondents to the effect that the petitioners should be given regular minimum pay scale for the posts they are holding as is available in other Government institutions or Undertakings and if they cannot be regularized against the sanctioned post, the Corporation should also fulfil the principle rationale to the circumstances for absorption of the petitioners against regular post as and when available and till then they should remain in the minimum pay scale. He then submits that when the aforesaid order was not complied with, the petitioners filed a contempt application being M.J.C. No.383/1998(R) and on the assurance of the Corporation, said contempt proceeding was dropped and the contempt application was disposed of vide order dated 01.07.1999. He submits that thereafter the Corporation fixed the pay scale of different posts vide office order dated 16.02.1999, contained in Annexure-6 of the writ petition, however, respondent no.4 requested respondent no.6 vide letter dated 13.12.2000 to maintain status quo with regard to the employees of the Corporation till Corporation/Board is reconstituted by the Government of Jharkhand and method was chalked out to pay salary. In this background, he submits that proper direction may kindly be issued and the impugned order may kindly be quashed. He next submits that another person, namely, Ram Sagar Pandey has approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No.2027 of 1999(R) and his termination order has been quashed by this Court vide order dated 18.08.2003 and proper direction has been issued. According to him, the present case is similar to that case and in view of that, similar order may kindly be passed and the prayer made in this writ petition may kindly be allowed.

4. Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the State of Bihar submits that the State of Bihar has nothing to do with the Corporation as the Corporation is an independent entity and only the said Corporation can take proper decision.

5. Mr. Sushant Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand submits that the said Corporation is not created in the State of Jharkhand and in view of that, no liability can be fastened upon the State of Jharkhand.

6. Ms. Shreesha Sinha, learned