Mr. Hemant Gupta, J.: - CWP No.14796 of 2003 has been placed before this Bench in terms of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court for consideration of issue of “equal pay for equal work” in respect of daily wage employees of the State Government by the Larger Bench in view of the contrary opinion expressed by two Division Benches of this Court. CWP No.8903 of 2010 and 22092 of 2010 have been ordered to be listed along with CWP No.14796 of 2003. However, for facility of reference, the facts are taken from CWP No.14796 of 2003.

2. The issue is whether a work-charge/ daily wage employee, is entitled to minimum basic pay and/or Dearness Allowance in regular pay scale in view of the assertion of the writ petitioners that they are doing the same work as is performed by a incumbent holding regular sanctioned post. Therefore, the action of discrimination in the matter of payment of pay is not sustainable on the touch stone of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3. One Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.337 of 2003 titled “State of Punjab and others Vs. Rajinder Singh and others” decided on 07.01.2009 has set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge in CWP No.1536 of 1988 titled “Rajinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others” decided on 05.02.2003. The learned single Judge has directed the State to pay to the writ petitioner’s minimum of the pay scale as revised from time to time with permissible allowances which are being given to the similarly placed regular employees for the last three years prior to the date of filing of the writ petition relying upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in State of Haryana and others Vs. Piara Singh and others, (1992) 4 SCC 118 and on the basis of order passed in Civil Appeal No.4492 of 1997 titled “State of Punjab Vs. Devinder Singh” decided on 21.07.1997.

4. Another Division Bench in LPA No.1024 of 2009 titled “State of Punjab and others Vs. Rajinder Kumar” and other 22 connected cases in its order dated 30.08.2010 allowed CWP No.14050 of 1999, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 20.11.2002. The Bench held that the writ petitioners are entitled to minimum of the pay scale of the categories to which they belong with all allowances as revised from time to time but with a rider that the benefit shall be confined to three years preceding the filing of the respective writ petitions. The earlier LPA judgment in Rajinder Singh’s case (supra) was not noticed by the later Division Bench. It was on the basis of said conflict in the two Division Benches of this Court, the matter was referred by the learned Single Judge on 11.05.2011 for decision by the larger Bench.

5. In the present writ petition, the petitioner was engaged as Pump Operator on work charge basis on 07.11.1996. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has worked for more than six years but is being paid Rs.3731/- for a month of 31 days, whereas similarly situated Pump Operators, who are doing same work are being paid basic pay of Rs.3420/- plus Dearness Allowances in the admissible pay scale. It is also pleaded that some of the similarly situated employees have filed writ petition bearing CWP No.7533 of 1995, which was allowed vide order dated 18.03.1998 (Annexure P-1). LPA No.292 of 1998 was dismissed on 15.07.1998 (Annexure P-2) against the said order. It is pointed out that State is in Special Leave Petition, but no stay has been granted.

6. It was pleaded in the written statement that no daily wage employee working in the Department has been granted minimum of regular pay scale and allowances except those who have been granted such relief by a Court. Reference was made to the number of appeals including LPA No.337 of 2003 which was stated to be pending. The said appeal has since been allowed as mentioned above on 07.01.2009 i.e. in Rajinder Singh’s case (supra). LPA No 466 of 2009 and LPA No. 910 of 2009 were stated to be pending, but the said appeals have since been