EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. A VINCENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 16. 6. 2004. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE writ petitioner joined the services of the appellant in 1993 as street light switch operator on daily wage basis. By the order impugned in the writ petition the writ petitioner was asked to work, but he was denied salary by the Executive Officer of the Panchayat from April 2001 on the ground that the financial condition of the panchayat was not satisfactory.

(3.) ARTICLE 23 of the Constitution of India specifically prohibits 'begari', that is taking labour from somebody without paying him. From April 2001 the appellant has not paid to the first respondent/writ petitioner. Hence the act is in violation of Article 23 of the Constitution of India. If the panchayat did not have adequate funds, it should not have taken work from the first respondent. After having taken work it is not open to the panchayat to say that it does not have finance to pay the salary. The writ appeal is dismissed. Consequently WAMP No. 7682 of 2004 is also dismissed. No costs.