TRISHALA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has alleged in the writ petition that she was appointed as clerk on daily wage basis on 18.10.1989 and continued to serve as clerk up to 22.4.1990. Neither appointment nor termination order was issued to the petitioner. Two other contentions were also made by the petitioner that the juniors in rank were permitted to continue in service and even fresh appointments were also made after the termination of services of the petitioner and that the petitioner was not paid equal pay as that of the regular clerk(s). The petitioner having contended that the action of the respondents is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India prays to quash the action of the respondents in terminating her services. She has also prayed for reinstatement with all service benefits and equal pay package as that of regular clerks in Haryana State.

(2.) In the reply filed by the State it has been contended that the petitioner was, of course, engaged on daily wage basis only for carrying out the work of checking of prise winning tickets. Her salary was paid from contingent fund as per the rates fixed by the local administration. It is further contended that the similarly placed persons referred to in the writ petition were disengaged and were not in employment with the respondent. It has also been submitted that the petitioner was not discharging the duties and responsibilities of a regular employee of the respondent. The petitioner who was engaged for the sole purpose of checking of prise winning tickets and was not at all engaged to discharge the job of a regular clerk, cannot claim equation of salary with that of a regular clerk. Therefore, it is submitted that the action of the respondents is not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) There arises the following two issues for determination :