Surendra Kumar & Others vs State of Uttarakhand & others

V.K. Bist, J.

Since prayers in all these writ petitions are common and question of law involved in all these writ petitions is also common, therefore, all the writ

petitions are clubbed together and are being decided by a common judgment. Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1968 of 2018 shall be the leading case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is not pressing prayer nos. (i) & (iii) at this stage and liberty be given to the petitioners to

approach the Court again in case need arises. This prayer of the petitioners is accepted. The writ petitions are dismissed as not pressed so far prayer

nos. (i) & (iii) are concerned with the aforesaid liberty.

Prayer no. (ii) has been made by the petitioners for direction to the respondents to pay minimum pay scale to the petitioners as granted to regular

Safai Karmachari/Paryavaran Mitra in the service of respondent no. 3 on the basis of principle of equal pay for equal work as laid down by

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and others reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148.

Petitioners were appointed on contractual basis in the erstwhile Nagar Palika, Rudrapur in the year 2011 & 2012 as Safai Karmchari (nomenclature

of which has been changed now as Paryavaran Mitra) and have been working continuously without any break till date. Nagar Palika, Rudrapur was

upgraded to Nagar Nigam, Rudrapur in the year 2013.

Case of the petitioners is that the work of Safai Karmchari/ Paryavaran Mitra is perennial in nature and the respondents are in continuous need of

services of petitioners as Safai Karmchari/ Paryavaran Mitra. They are being permitted to continue the work on the said post. Further case of the

petitioners is that petitioners are discharging identical duties, responsibilities and function like regular incumbents. Rather they are more punctual than

the regular incumbents; but, slight slackness on their part can lead to their termination, as there are no regular safeguards in the services of the

petitioners. At present petitioners are being paid `9,000/- per month while the regular incumbents are getting more than `21,655/- per month. In this

regard, petitioner made several representations before the respondents and the last representation was made on 28.03.2018 for regularization as well

as for payment of equal pay; but, the representation of the petitioners has not been considered by the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that various Government Orders were issued by the State Government from time to time by which the

services of 859 Safai Karmchari/ Paryavaran Mitras were regularized. At this, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that those Safai

Karmchari/ Paryavaran Mitra, who were regularized were working against the sanctioned posts and were fully eligible.

Learned counsel for the petitioners then submitted that most of the incumbents are having required qualification and are working against the

sanctioned posts.

Though, it is the case of the respondents that the petitioners are not working against the sanctioned posts; but, it is not denied by the respondents

that the petitioners are also doing the same work, which is done by the regular Safai Karmchari/ Paryavaran Mitra. This fact is admitted to the

respondents.

Since the work of the petitioners as well as regular incumbents is the same and as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of

State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and others reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148, the petitioners are entitled for minimum of pay which regular

employees are getting.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondents to give minimum pay scale to the petitioners at the earliest; but,

not later than 05.11.2018.

All pending applications also stand disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be placed in the file of all the connected writ petitions.