BUDDHADEV MAITY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order dtd. 29/5/2014 passed by the respondent no.11; as also for an order directing the respondent nos. 1 to 4 to compute the differential salary/wages as payable to the petitioner in terms of Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition), Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Rules"), with a further direction upon the respondent nos. 8 to 11 to pay the same.

(2.) The petitioner claims that the petitioner is a former employee of the respondent nos. 9 and 10 owned and operated by the respondent nos. 1 and 2. He claims to have rendered uninterrupted services with the respondent nos. 9 and 10 at their Haldia Refinery from 1985 till 13/3/2011, when the petitioner was allegedly driven out by way of refusal of allotment of duties. According to the petitioner although, he was working directly under the supervisions of the respondent nos. 10 to 12, he was shown to be engaged through Contractors.

(3.) It is the petitioner's case that despite the fact that the petitioner was discharging the same duties as his counterparts who are on the rolls and despite the nature of work being perennial, the counter parts of the petitioner who are regular worker of the respondent nos. 8 to 12, were being paid their salaries in the scale of pay as determined by the Competent Authority. However, in the case of the petitioner, the same was being denied. In the circumstances as aforesaid, the petitioner had demanded equal pay for equal work and similar salary including allowance as paid to the regular employees of the respondent nos. 8 to 12.