PATIRAM PARIHAR Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri B.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on part of the respondents in not extending the benefit of Minimum of Pay Scale from the date of his classification but similarly situated employees have been extended the benefit. The action of respondents is clearly illegal, arbitrary, mala-fide and against the law.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite being classified as a permanent employee on the post of Meth vide order dated 25/10/2005, the petitioner continued to receive daily wages less than the minimum stage of regular pay-scale without increments till the age of superannuation. The pecuniary entitlement of daily wager after being classified as a permanent employee is no more res integra in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Ram Naresh Rawat Vs. Shri Ashwani Ray & Ors , 2017 3 SCC 436 in which is held thus:-