Back
2021 Supreme(UK) 643
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
State Of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Bahadur Singh Rawat & Ors. - Respondents
Special Appeal No. 367 of 2017
Decided On : 21-10-2021
Pradeep Joshi, Advocate, Pooran Singh Rawat, Advocate
Contractual workers are entitled to receive Dearness Allowance based on a concession made by the State, as established by the previous Supreme Court judgment.
Headnote:
Delay Condonation - Employment Dispute - The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal and dismissed the appeal based on the precedent set by a previous Supreme Court judgment regarding entitlement to Dearness Allowance for contractual workers.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was filed with a delay of 59 days, which was condoned by the court. The issue involved whether the petitioners were entitled to receive the minimum of the pay-scale and the Dearness Allowance admissible to regularly appointed employees.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the issue was already covered by a previous Supreme Court judgment, which held that contractual workers were entitled to receive the Dearness Allowance based on a concession made by the State.
Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of the petitioners to receive the Dearness Allowance comparable to regularly appointed employees.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the precedent set by the previous Supreme Court judgment, which held that contractual workers were entitled to receive the Dearness Allowance based on the concession made by the State.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, stating that it did not find any merit in the present Appeal and made no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ. - There is delay of 59 days in filing the present Appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Delay Condonation Application (CLMA NO. 7068 of 2017), the delay is condoned. The Delay Condonation Application stands allowed accordingly.
3. Both the learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the issue involved in the present Appeal is already covered by the case of Uttaranchal Van Shramik Sangh Ranibagh Etc. vs. The State of Uttarakhand and Others SLP (C) Nos. 11651-11652 of 2019, decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its judgment dated 12.02.2020.
4. The issue before the learned Writ Court was whether the petitioners were entitled to receive the minimum of the pay-scale, and the Dearness Allowance admissible to the regularly appointed employees, or not?
5. By order dated 23.03.2017, the learned Single Judge directed the respondent-State "to pay and release the Dearness Allowance to the petitioners at par with the members of Kumaun Ban Shramik Sangh, Center at Ranikhet with effect from 21.03.2002 within a period of ten weeks from the date of the order with arrears". He further directed that "the petitioners shall be entitled to interest @ Rs. 12% per annum and if the amount is not released to the petitioners, the petitioners shall be entitled to 18% interest per annum till the payment is made to them".
6. In the case of Uttaranchal Van Shramik Sangh Ranibagh Etc. (supra), the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was whether the contractual workers were entitled to receive the Dearness Allowance or not?
7. A concession was made by the State before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the Dearness Allowance is being given to the other daily-wagers. Therefore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that "suffice for us to say that if dearness allowance is being given to other daily wagers, naturally the State will not discriminate the daily-wagers on this aspect."
8. Once a concession was made by the State before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the State is equally bound by the said concession.
9. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the present Appeal. It is, hereby, dismissed.
10. No order as to costs.
