MAYARAM YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs:-

(2.) Mr. Harsh Mandar Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was employed by respondent No. 4 as Watchman for a period of 89 days and posted him at Middle School Laad, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) vide order dtd. 17/10/2006. From the date of his appointment, petitioner continuously worked till 31/10/2009. Though petitioner was initially engaged and posted as Watchman for a period of 89 days, but he continued till 31/10/2009. He signed the attendance register maintained by Middle School Laad, Korba, District Korba (C.G.). No order of removing petitioner or stopping him from the work was issued by respondent No. 3 or any of school authority neither in writing nor orally. On 9/10/2009, respondent No. 3 issued a letter calling explanation from the petitioner within a period of 1 week that he is working without any order after completion of 89 days and even the appointment for a period of 89 days to be illegal. Respondents who took service of petitioner from 23/10/2006 till 31/10/2009 have not paid his wages till date, hence, a direction be issued to the respondents to make payment of wages, for which, petitioner worked and also interest upon it at the rate of 12%.

(3.) Per contra, Mr. Ali Asgar, learned Deputy Advocate General along with Mr. Shakti Singh Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents would submit that from Annexure P/1, it is also apparent that petitioner was engaged as Watchman only for 89 days, however, he continued to work as Watchman till 31/10/2009, but due to not receiving allotment of funds under "Labour head" for payment to petitioner it could not be paid. He submits that respondent No. 4 calculated wages to be paid as Rs.99,105.00 and forwarded the same to respondent No. 3 on 2/4/2013 itself, till date, amount under the "head of Labour" has not been allotted to respondent No. 4, hence, payment could not be effected. It is contended that as soon as amount will be allotted form the Office of Commissioner, payment will be made immediately without any delay. Mr. Ali, Deputy Advocate General on instructions, submits that till date, funds have not been allotted. He contended that respondent No. 4 is making effort to get allotment of funds at the earliest. He pointed out that as non-payment of wages to petitioner is only on account of non-allotment of fund, interest may not be imposed.