LATEEF AHMAD MOCHI Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Md. Akram Chowdhary, J . 1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking setting aside the Order No. 53-Accounts of 2022 dtd. 20/4/2022 (hereinafter called as 'impugned order'), with further direction to the respondents to release the minimum wages as per the existing rates @ Rs.300.00 per day in favour of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 being unskilled workers and for petitioner No.2, being skilled worker, as per the existing rates prescribed for the skilled workers. Furthermore, direction be issued against the respondents to pay arrears withheld from 1/1/2018 till date with admissible rate of interest accrued thereon.

(2.) In response to the Writ Petition filed by the petitioners herein, respondents have filed their response, contending therein that the impugned order bearing No. 53-Accounts of 2022 dtd. 20/4/2022 has been passed by the respondents in compliance to the directions of this Court passed in WP(C) No.325/2022 titled Lateef Ahmad Mochi and Ors. Vs. UT of J&K and Ors., as on consideration, the claim of the petitioners was found devoid of merits, hence rejected in light of the rules and norms governing the field. It is further contended that so far as the minimum wages as per the existing rates @ Rs.300.00 per day is concerned, it is legally impermissible, as the petitioners were engaged as Sweepers/Chowkidars on consolidated wages and are being paid monthly remuneration as prescribed in the Government Order No. 236-F of 2012 dtd. 19/10/2012 and their claim for release of minimum wages as per Government order No. 27-F of 2018 dtd. 25/1/2018 is legally impermissible, as this order is applicable to daily rated workers including causal labourers working in Government Departments/Municipalities/Local Bodies, whereas SRO 460 of 2017 covers Scheduled Employment notified by the Labour and Employment Department, as such, the instant writ petition was sought to be dismissed.

(3.) Petitioners are aggrieved of the different treatment of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on one hand respondents have accepted the claim of the similarly placed co-petitioners and on the other hand, rejected the identical claim of the petitioners herein. The petitioners and co-petitioners earlier filed Writ Petitions bearing WP(C) No. 325/2022 and WP(C) No. 393/2020 respectively with the prayer to pay minimum wages in accordance with SRO 460 of 2017 read with Government order No. 27-F of 2018 dtd. 25/1/2018. These petitions were disposed of with similar and identical directions, however, the respondents, in the case of co-petitioners, acted upon the court direction and paid minimum wages as per SRO 460 of 2017 in favour of co-petitioners, whileas in the case of the petitioners herein, their claim was rejected on the ground that they are not Scheduled Employees though being similarly situated with the co-petitioners. The agony of the petitioners was further aggravated, when the co-petitioners thereafter were given the benefit of enhanced wages in terms of SRO 460 of 2017. Co-petitioners, in this regard, had earlier filed petition WP(C) No.1290/2021, which was allowed vide order dtd. 24/5/2022 with the direction to the respondents to give them the benefit of enhanced wages in terms of SRO 460 of 2017.