Back
2014 Supreme(Megh) 158
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.
Giliancy Jyrwa - Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya - Respondent
WP(C) No. 234/2014
Decided On : 08-07-2014
For the Appellant : K.C.H. Gautam, Adv.
For the Respondents: N.D. Chullai, Sr. GA. and K.P. Bhattacharjee, GA
Entitlement of Muster Roll Workers to benefits under specific Office Memoranda and the obligation of the Executive Engineer to consider their case for compliance.
Headnote:
Muster Roll Workers - Employment Benefits - The court directed the Executive Engineer to dispose of the joint representation dated 31.01.2014 within three months, considering the observations made in the judgment and order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Muster Roll Workers, sought benefits under an Office Memorandum dated 16.09.1996 and another Office Memorandum dated 10.09.2013. They had completed service ranging from 14 to 32 years and were seeking wages at par with semi-skilled workers.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the Executive Engineer to dispose of the joint representation dated 31.01.2014 within three months, considering the observations made in the judgment and order.
Issues: Interpretation of the Office Memoranda dated 16.09.1996 and 10.09.2013, entitlement to benefits for Muster Roll Workers, and pending representation with the Executive Engineer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the petitioners' cases were covered by the Office Memorandum dated 16.09.1996 and directed the Executive Engineer to consider their case under the Office Memoranda for necessary compliance.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the Executive Engineer was directed to dispose of the joint representation dated 31.01.2014 within three months, considering the observations made in the judgment and order.
Judgment
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.1. Heard Mr. K CH Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. ND Chullai, learned Sr. GA assisted by Mr. KP Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing for the respondents No. 1-4.
2. For disposing of the present writ petition in the manner indicated below, service of notice to the respondents No. 5-15 may not be required.
3. The fact sufficient for deciding the present writ petition is briefly noted. The petitioners 5(five) in numbers are still serving as Muster Roll Workers in the Office of the Executive Engineer PWD (Roads) Shillong South Division, Shillong. The dates of their appointments as Muster Roll Workers are clearly mentioned in Para 2 of the present writ petition. The date of joining, seniority and length of service of the petitioners are as follows:-
It is the further case of the petitioners that they have been continuously discharging their duties as Muster Roll Workers without any break from the dates of their appointments indicated above. The Govt. of Meghalaya, Personnel & Administrative Reforms (B) Department issued an Office Memorandum being No. PER(AR)36/95/70 dated Shillong, the 16.09.1996; and the said Office Memorandum dated 16.09.1996 is for the benefits of the Muster Rolls and other casual workers, who are working in the different departments and offices of the State Govt. Para 3 of the said Office Memorandum dated 16.09.1996 clearly provided that "a casual workers who has, immediately before the date of coming into force of this scheme, been working as such for a continuous period of not less than ten years may be conferred with a status of a Regular Casual Worker from such date, not being a date earlier than the date this scheme came into force, as the appointed authority may by order specify." The copy of the said Office Memorandum dated 16.09.1996 is available at Annexure-II to the present writ petition. On bare perusal of the said Scheme dated 16.09.1996 vis-a-vis the dates of appointments of the writ petitioners No. 1 & 2, it is clear that the cases of the petitioners No. 1 & 2 had been covered by the said Office Memorandum/Scheme dated 16.09.1996 inasmuch as the date of appointment of the petitioner No. 1 as Muster Roll Worker is April, 1983 and the date of appointment of the petitioner No. 2 as Muster Roll Worker is May, 1984.
4. The Govt. of Meghalaya issued another Office Memorandum dated 10.09.2013 wherein, it has been clearly indicated that the Governor of Meghalaya is pleased to order that payment of wages to Muster Rolls/Regular Casual Workers shall be as categorized as below:-
(a) Muster Rolls with less than 5 years of service may be treated at par with the Unskilled wage workers;
(b) Muster Rolls with more than 5 years of service but not conferred with RCW (Regular Casual Workers) status be treated at par with the Semi-skilled wage workers;
All the petitioners had completed Muster Rolls service ranging 32 to 14 years and therefore, wages of the petitioners should be the wages of the semi-skilled wage workers. It is the further case of the petitioners that they are not even allowed to enjoy the wage of semi-skilled workers. It is also stated in the writ petition that they had also filed a joint representation dated 31.01.2014 to the Executive Engineer, PWD (Roads), Shillong South Division, Meghalaya, Shillong for considering their case under the said Office Memoranda so as to enable them to allow the benefits under the said Office Memoranda. The said representation dated 31.01.2014 is still pending with the Executive Engineer, PWD (Roads), Shillong South Division, Meghalaya, Shillong.
5. In the above factual backdrop, the Executive Engineer, PWD (Roads), Shillong South Division, Meghalaya, Shillong is directed to dispose of the said joint representation dated 31.01.2014 keeping in view of the observations made in the present judgment and order within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and order. The petitioner
