GHANASHYAM NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who were admittedly working on N.M.R. basis as truck driver, jeep driver and helpers respectively in the establishment of Baghua Irrigation Division under Irrigation Department of Government of Orissa filed a petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') praying to determine the amount due to them, calculating their wages on par with the regular employees and for directing the management to pay the same. The petition was registered as Misc. Case No. 81 of 1998. The prayer of the petitioner was turned down by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jeypore (Koraput) by order dated 3.8.1999. The said order of the Presiding Officer is impugned in this writ application.

(2.) Mr. Palit, learned counsel for the petitioners forcefully contended that the principle of "equal pay for equal work" being a Constitutional mandate is applicable to the petitioners and as such they were entitled to the same scales of pay which their counterparts in regular establishment were drawing. The wages of different employees working in the regular establishment similarly placed like the petitioners being admitted, according to the learned counsel, there was no embargo for the Labour Court to determine the amounts payable to the petitioners and issue direction to the management in exercise of the powers conferred upon it under Section 33-C (2) of the Act to pay the balance amount after deducting the wages already paid.

(3.) For the sake of brevity, a few facts Which are not in dispute may be noticed. The petitioners were engaged on N.M.R. basis in the establishment of opposite party No. 3 respectively on 1.4.1990, 1.8.1989, 1.3.1991 and 1.3.1991 as truck driver, jeep driver and helpers. According to them, though they were doing the same work as their counterparts in the regular establishment, they were being paid only nominal wages. It was further pleaded that in the year 1999 the petitioners were provisionally appointed on ad hoc basis against the existing vacancies of regular (wages) post as thereafter they were receiving pay in regular scales. Learned counsel for the petitioners forcefully submitted that applying the principle of "equal pay for equal work" the petitioners were entitled to Wages of regular employees during their N.M.R. tenure.