SURJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in these two writ petitions under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, pray for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant and pay to the petitioners regular pay scale of the posts held by the petitioners on the principle of equal pay for equal work with arrears thereof along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum.

(2.) THE petitioners are employed with the Department of Public Health, Government of Punjab, as Pump Operators, Fitters, Chowkidars, Malis, Helpers, Helper-drivers, M. C. C. , Petrol Men etc. Except few petitioners, all other petitioners have been serving on the said posts for a long period spreading over a period of 5 to 14 years. There are few petitioners who have been working as Sewermen, Pump Operators etc. from the year 1996, in the same department. These are the petitioners who have just completed a period of three years on the date of filing of the petition or a little short of the said period. According to the petitioners, they have worked for all this period to the satisfaction of all concerned and are performing the work and functions identical to the ones which their counterparts appointed in the regular cadre are discharging. While relying upon various judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, the petitioners claim that they are entitled to the payment of regular pay-scale from the date they have been appointed or taken in employment on their respective posts.

(3.) UPON notice, reply was filed on behalf of the State wherein it was stated that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court and the -Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ranbir Singh v. State of Haryana 1998 Lab IC 1449, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. However, it was not disputed that the petitioners have been employed on daily wages and it was stated that they are engaged and their names were duly mentioned in the muster roll and no letters of appointment were issued to them. It was stated that there are no regular posts against these workers. It was stated that; a daily wager cannot be equated to a regular employee as their mode of enrolment and employment is totally different. Thus, on behalf of the respondents, it was submitted that the petition should be dismissed.