STATE OF U P Vs. SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four intra court appeals have been filed by the State of U.P. against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 24/2/1998, passed in connected Writ Petition No. 15949 of 1996 Suresh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P., Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15745 of 1996 Radhey Shyam and 12 Ors v. State of U.P., Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15746 of 1996 Ram Prasad and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15813 of 1996 Prithvi Pal and 32 Ors. v. State of U.P.

(2.) The writ petitioners (respondents in all the appeals) were working in Public Works Department in district Fatehpur on class IV posts. Their initial engagement was on daily wage basis, however in due course of time they were brought on temporary Muster Roll and in some cases they were brought on permanent Muster Roll. The grievance raised by the writ petitioners was that they were not being paid salary as admissible to the regular employees working in the same department and discharging the same duties and also that such regular employees were being provided the benefits of medical leave, earned leave, leave encashment or bonus, provident fund and also the Employees State Insurance Scheme but, the same was not being provided to the writ petitioners. The prayer sought in the writ petition was to pay the equal emoluments as the employees engaged on regular basis as well as other service benefits admissible to them. As the question raised and the reliefs claimed in all the writ petitions were similar, the learned Single Judge clubbed all the writ petitions and decided them by common judgment whereby, he allowed the writ petitions and directed that the petitioners would be entitled to the same salary and allowances as are being paid to their counter parts who were appointed on regular basis, with all consequential benefits.

(3.) The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15744 of 1996 and 15746 of 1996, were initially appointed as Beldars on daily wage basis, later on their names were placed in the temporary muster roll and subsequently in permanent muster roll and were being paid a fixed sum of Rs. 1825/- per month as wages whereas their counter parts who were employed on regular basis were being paid higher salary and other benefits. The petitioners in other two writ petitions namely 15949 of 1996, 15745 of 1996, were initially engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis and subsequently their names were brought on the temporary Muster Roll and were being paid wages @ Rs. 36/- per day whereas the regular class IV employees were drawing higher salary. The learned Single Judge framed single question for consideration that being whether the petitioners are legally entitled to equal pay for equal work and other benefits and privileges. The question as framed by the learned Single Judge is as follows : The moot point which arises for consideration is whether the petitioners are legally entitled to 'equal pay for equal work' and other benefits and privileges as are admissible to the other regular employees of the department of the same category/cadre or should there be a distinction in the emoluments of the employees working on Muster Roll basis and the regular employees of the department?