RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As all these above five petitions raised a common question of law based on somewhat similar facts, we consider it appropriate to dispose of these petitions by a common judgment.

(2.) All the petitioners in each of these petitions are working as Beldars, Chowkidars, Malis, Pump Operators, Fitter, Coolies, Sewermen etc. in the Public Health Department of State of Punjab. These petitioners are posted and are working in different districts of the State of Punjab. According to the petitioners, they are working in their respective posts for a considerable period in their respective departments. The period of employment varies from 3 years to 14 years. On the date of institution of the respective petitions. During this long period the petitioners have worked to the satisfaction of all concerned. The petitioners also satisfy the prescribed qualifications for appointment to the respective posts where they are working presently. According to the petitioners despite the fact that there is continuity in their employment for this long period, they are still being paid the daily wages and their names have been recorded in the muster roll maintained by the department. On these premises, the petitioners pray that the payment of daily wages by the State is apparently unfair and contrary to the law enunciated by the Supreme Court. Therefore, they pray that the State be directed to pay them regular pay scale or atleast the minimum of the pay scale which their counter-part regular employees are receiving. The petitioners have further pleaded that they are doing identical work and duties which are being performed by the regular employees holding the same posts and in the same department and the districts. The petitioners rely upon a judgment of this Court in CWP No. 7533 of 1995, titled as Talwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, decided on 18.3.1998, which decision has been affirmed by the Letters Patent Bench and other Division Bench judgment of this Court where equal pay for equal work was granted and the said orders have been affirmed by the Apex Court.

(3.) At this stage itself we may notice that in all these writ petitions, except CWP No. 10210 of 2000, petitioners have prayed for payment of regular pay scale and have claimed arrears with interest. In that writ, the petitioners had also claimed the relief in relation to regularisation of their services in the respective departments, however, learned counsel for the petitioners, on 13.12.2000 made the following statement :-