RISHI PAL SINGH Vs. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners' claim is founded on the principle of 'equal' pay for equal work'. The Petitioners appear to have been engaged as a Regular Muster Roll (RMR) workers in .the post of Mechanic-cum- Operator in CWP No. 6565/1996. CWP 6555/1998, CWP 6552/1998, CWP 656,4/1998, CWP 6553/1998, in the post of Mason in CWP No.6554/1998 and in the post of Tyreman in CWP No. 6556/1998 which is a Group 'C' post. In order to prove that they have been working on this post for several years, copies of the Identity Cards and Muster Roll have been filed. This clearly evidences that the Petitioners have been working since 1986 as an Operator. The Respondent however asserts that after their appointment in Group D, the Petitioners were only asked to perform duties falling in this Group.

(2.) On 4.4.1997 the following paragraph in the Circular of the Respondent was published:

(3.) The Petitioners applied for this appointment pursuant to the Circular and were appointed as the Group 'D' post of Beldar, with effect from 23/10/1997. The contention of the Petitioners is that although they were regularly appointed to the post of Beldar from this date, they continued to diligently perform the duties of an Operator/Tyreman/Mason as they had been doing since their initial appointment, over a decade previously. Since the Petitioners had rendered service in the post of Operator even after 23.10.1997, they are entitled to receive the remunerations 'payable to, Group 'C' employees .