OM PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. RSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming the regular pay scale on the post of conductor and has prayed that the respondent be directed to grant him the regular pay scale from the date of his appointment i.e. 22.12.1986. Earlier then filing the present writ petition, the petitioner had filed another writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2400/91, Om Prakash Sharma Vs. RSRTC & Another . In the said writ petition, the petitioner challenged the order dated 16.6.1988 passed by the respondent terminating his services. The said writ petition was decided by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 9.9.1991 and the order of termination of the petitioner from service was declared illegal and quashed and the respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner in service. The court however declined to grant back wage to the petitioner as he had earlier prosecuted a wrong remedy by filing a civil suit.The petitioner however was held entitled to actual wage only from 26.6.1991. The period of service was ordered to be counted for the other purpose in accordance with law.

(2.) In the present writ petition, the petitioner has simply claimed salary of the post of conductor on the principle of equal pay for equal work. The petitioner has not placed any material on record to indicate as to what was the nature of his appointment and as to what was nature of duties he was discharging except stating that he was appointed on daily wage @ Rs. 20.00 vide order dated 18.12.1986 as conductor in Kota Division of RSRTC.

(3.) The respondent RSRTC has contested the present writ petition by filing reply thereto. In para 3 of the reply, it has been averred that the petitioner has not been able to make out any case whatsoever so as to indicate any violation of Articles 14, 16, 39(1)(d) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has not stated as to what are the duties assigned to any other conductors. It has been stated in the order to claim parity of pay, the petitioner ought to have indicated what the salary of other conductors and what was the nature of work assigned to them. He should have also placed the material on record to show the nature of his own appointment and salary which he was presently receiving.