TUKARAM KISAN NANAWARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition arises out of proceedings under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(2.) The petitioner is employed in the establishment of the Mula Canal Division of respondent No. 1 State Government. He was recruited as a mukadam on or about 21st February, 1964. However, though he was recruited as mukadam, the actual work that he carried out since inception of his recruitment as mukadam was as follows :--- He used to record the attendance of the workers in the Muster-Roll. He would then send the daily report of the work done by the mazdoors to his superiors. He maintained the density register and registers of Nominal Moisture Content and Optimum Moisture Contents. At the end of each month he had to prepare the pay register. It was his function to receive leave application of the workers and submit them to the superiors for sanction. He maintained the Weight Register and records of permeability test from time to time. He also maintained the register under the Employment Guarantee Scheme. He also maintained the register of distribution of diesel oil to the drivers and prepared indent cards for the diesel and credit memos of the diesel purchased on credit.

(3.) Though, aforesaid was in fact the work and duties performed by the petitioner all throughout the relevant period and though this work was of a clerk, the petitioner was paid not the salary of a clerk in whose purview the work fell but only the salary of a mukadam in whose purview the aforesaid work and duties or in any event most of them would not fall. The petitioner, therefore, filed application under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter the Act) inter alia claiming the difference in emoluments between the salary of a mukadam which he was being paid and the salary of a clerk to which he was entitled to. To this application several defences were raised.