The main legal point established in the judgment is that daily wage employees who have completed 10 years of service are entitled to the minimum of the pay scales of the regularly appointed employees pending regularisation.

( 1 ) THESE petitions in hand have been filed by the petitioners who have been stagnating in various nagar Nigams/nagar Palika Parishads as Daily wage Class IV employees ever since their induction in the service prior to June, 1991. Since all the petitions are knit together by common cause and have been filed for the common reliefs, they have been heard together for decision as a composite case.

( 2 ) WRIT Petition No. 2093 of 2002, Praveen Kumar v. State of U. P. , is taken up as a leading case to get hang of the substance of the controversy involved in the petitions. The petitioner in the aforestated writ petition, namely, Praveen Kumar had entered the service of the Nagar Palika parishad, Modi Nagar on 8. 1. 1991 as Electrician and ever since then he has been performing his duties assigned to him in the capacity of daily wage employee in unbroken continuity.

( 3 ) I have heard Sarvsri R. C. Shukla, Y. K. Sinha, Neeraj Tripathi and other learned counsel appearing for respective petitioners in the writ petitions taken together for disposal as a composite case.

( 4 ) IN paragraphs 18 and 28 of the writ petition instituted by Sri Praveen Kumar, the petitioner has specifically averred that he is performing self-same duties and discharging self-same functions at par with regularly appointed persons and he has completed a span of more than 12 years as such and by this reckoning, he is entitled to regular salary as being paid to regularly appointed persons. It is further averred in the writ petition, that representation was also preferred seeking regularisation of service and payment of salary at par with regularly appointed persons. The quintessence of what has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that all the petitioners have been discharging their duties similar to the duties being performed by the regularly appointed persons since as far back as the year 1991 and it would thus transpire that there is felt necessity to have the posts qua the strength of daily wage employees in the Nagar palika Parishads/nagar Nigams in the State of U. P. To enforce his submissions, the learned counsel placed credence on a decision in Dharwad District P. W. D. Literate Daily Wage employees Association and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Anr. , 1990 (2) SLR 43 and State of u. P. v. Putti Lal 2002 (3) AWC 2375 (SC) : 2002 (2) UPLBEC 5195. In Putti Lals case, the apex Court has directed to consider the case of regularisation according to Regularisation Rules, 2002 and for the interim, the Apex Court ordered payment of minimum of the pay scale as applicable to their counter part in the Government until services of such daily age employees are regularised. The other decisions relied upon by the learned counsel are Gujarat Agricultural university v. Rathod Labhu Bechar, 2001 (1) AWC 2. 3 (SC) (NOC) : AIR 2o01 SC 706 ; jayanta Biswas v. University of Calcutta and Ors. , (2001) 1 UPLBEC 74 and Daily rated Casual labour employed under P and T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tar Majdoor Manch v. Union of India and Ors. , AIR 1987 SC 2342, to hammer home the submissions aforestated.

( 5 ) IN the counter-affidavit, the averments made in paras 18 and 28 of the writ petition have not been repudiated in so far as they relate to regularisation. In fact, the stand taken by Sri Pankaj mittal, is one of avowal of the claim of the petitioners to the extent of their claim for regularisation but at the same time, the learned counsel did not mince words to state that the nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar has already put in papers to the State Government for creation of posts and it would act upon regularisation process as soon as the requisite posts are sanctioned by the State Government. The learned counsel, however, vehemently demurred to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were entitled to minimum of the pay scale applicable to their counterpart in the Parishad and in vindication