ROOP LAL Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition the petitioner alleges that though he is shown to be appointed as cleaner but he is actually working as a driver in the respondent-department. According to the petitioner since May, 1992 he is working as driver but has been paid salary of a cleaner. He was regularly appointed as cleaner on 1.1.1994 in the pay scale of Rs.770- 1320/-.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that though he was appointed as cleaner but he was made to do the work of a driver and he, therefore, prays that the respondents be directed to appoint Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? . the applicant as driver w.e.f. May, 1992 and be also directed to pay equal pay for equal work.