Mitendra Singh And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matter in Court.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the respondents to grant the regular pay-scale and allowances to the petitioners at par with the post of Programmer under the Rajasthan Subordinate Service Rules with effect from their joining the duties with all the natural consequences and consider the cases of the petitioners for the purpose of regularization.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Computer Programmer / MIS Manager on contractual basis on a monthly consolidated sum of Rs.8,000/-. The petitioners have been working on the said position since their joining.

It is indicated that as the petitioners have been working on the said position of Computer Programmer / MIS Manager for over ten years now on a consolidated salary, which salary though has been increased from time to time from Rs.8,000/- to Rs.14,000/- now the petitioners are entitled to at least grant minimum of the pay-scale for the post of Computer Programmer.

Reliance has been placed on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Jagjit Singh & Ors.: (2017)1SCC148.

Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the submissions and submitted that the petitioners were appointed on contractual basis and is continuing on such position and is not entitled for any relief and, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

Hon'ble Supreme in the case of Jagjit Singh (supra) after considering the issues similar to the present situation, inter alia, laid down as under:-

"60. Having traversed the legal parameters with reference to the application of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work', in relation to temporary employees(daily-wage employees, ad-hoc appointees, employees appointed on casual basis, contractual employees andthe like), the sole factor that requires our determination is, whether the concerned employees(before this Court), were rendering similar duties and responsibilities, as were being discharged by regular employees, holding the same/corresponding posts. This exercise would require the application of the parameters of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' summarized by us in paragraph 42 above. However, insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, it is not difficult for us to record the factual position. We say so, because it was fairly acknowledged by the learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, that all the temporary employees in the present bunch of appeals, were appointed against posts which were also available in the regular cadre/establishment. It was also accepted, that during the course of their employment, the temporary employees concerned were being randomly deputed to discharge duties and responsibilities, which at some point in time, were assigned to regular employees. Likewise, regular employees holding substantive posts,were also posted to discharge the same work, which was assigned to temporary employees, from time to time. There is, therefore, no room for any doubt, that the duties and responsibilities discharged by the temporary employees in the present set of appeals,were the same as were being discharged by regular employees. It is not the case of the appellants, that the respondent-employees did not possess the qualifications prescribed for appointment on regular basis. Furthermore, it is not the case of the State, that any of the temporary employees would not be entitled to pay parity, on any of the principles summarized by us in paragraph 42 hereinabove. There can be no doubt, that the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' would be applicable to all the temporary employees concerned, so as to vest in them the right to claim wages, on a par with the minimum of the pay-scale of regularly engaged Government employees, holding the same post.

In view of the position expressed by us in the foregoing paragraph, we have no hesitation in holding, that all the temporary employees concerned, in the present bunch of cases, would be entitled to draw wages at the minimum of the pay- scale at the lowest grade, in the regular pay- scale), extended to regular employees, holding the same post."

As the facts in the present case are similar to the case of Jagjit Singh (supra), the petitioners are entitled to relief as granted in the said case.

Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioners are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to draw salary / wages at the minimum pay-scale (at the lowest grade in the regular pay-scale)extended to regular employees holding the post of Computer Programmer.

Needful may be done by the respondents within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the respondents.