STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MOOL SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed against the order dated 30-5-1994, contained in Annexure-3 to this petition, passed by the Labour Court in its power under S. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as "the I.D. Act").

(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this petition are that respondent-workman claims that he was appointed on the post of Munshi Grade-II since 2-12-82 but he was regularly discharging the duties of Munshi Grade-I (Lower Division Clerk) and he had been denied the emoluments for the post of Munshi Grade-I. With these allegations, respondent-workman filed an application under S. 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act. Petitioner controverted and categorically denied the assertions made by the workman and it was urged by the petitioner that respondent-workman had never discharged the duties of Munshi Grade-I. Its case had been that the workman was engaged on daily wages on muster roll basis and on completion of two years in service, he was conferred with the semi-permanent status on the post of Beldar under the Work Charge Rules, 1964. It was also urged by the petitioner before the Labour Court that there was an agreement dated 21-1-1989 in force, according to which twenty-five per cent vacancies on the post of Munshi Grade-I were filled up from senior-most persons in Beldar cadre and remaining like the respondent No. 1 were appointed on the post of Munshi Grade-II. Petitioner, also, raised an objection before the Labour Court regarding maintainability of the said application. However, after adjudicating the matter, the Labour Court allowed the application of the workman and directed the petitioner to pay the difference of salary between the pay scales of Munshi Grade-II and Munshi Grade-I with effect from 1-4-85 to 30-6-1990. Hence this petition.

(3.) Heard Mr. R.P. Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. K. Parihar, learned counsel for respondent-workman.