JAI KARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. H. A, Raza, J. The question of law involved in this writ petition is the same as in the writ petition bearing No. 3558 (SS) of 1992 and similar other writ petitions which were allowed by the Hon'ble the Single Judge of this Court except writ petition No. 1502 (SS) of 1992 and also quashed the notification dated 20. 2. 92 (as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition No. 3558 (SS) of 1992) by means of which the nomenclature of the petitioners was changed to that of tubewell assistants and honoraria for Rs. 550/- per month was fixed. In the aforesaid bunch of writ petitions the opposite parties were directed to pay all the petitioners the same emoluments i. e. in the same scale of pay in which other regularly appointed tubwell operators were being paid. However, the writ petition bearing No. 1502 (SS) of 1992 filed by the State Engineer-in-chief, Irrigation Department, U. P and others v. Makrand Singh and others was also dismissed by the Court. I respectfully agree with the view expressed by the Hon'ble the Single Judge, in the aforesaid writ petitions.

(2.) IN view of the aforesaid situation I, after hearing the counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Chief Standing Coun sel, am of the view that the petitioners of this writ petition are also entitled to the benefits which accrued to the petitioners of Writ Petition No. 3558 (SS) of 1992 and similar other writ petitions, with prospec tive effect.