STATE OF TELANGANA Vs. M KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 29.03.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.2 of 2018 in W.P.No.5115 of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the application for vacating the order dated 22.02.2018, in I.A.No.1 of 2018, and made the said order an absolute one.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the appellants submits that the respondents had filed a writ petition seeking the benefit of the minimum timescale of pay attached to the posts of class IV employees, as they were engaged as cooks and watchmen on a daily wage basis. According to the learned Government Pleader, despite the fact that it was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge that the petitioners happen to discharge their duties only for a few hours in a day, the learned Single Judge, relied upon the case of the State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh and others, 2017 1 SCC 148, and directed the appellants to pay the respondent-petitioners the minimum timescale of pay attached to the posts of class IV employees during the pendency of the writ petition. However, subsequently, the appellants had filed an application for vacating the said order. Despite the oral submission with regard to the duration of the work period, the same has not been recorded by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the learned Single Judge has erred in making the stay order an absolute one.

(3.) Secondly, since the respondents were not working against regular posts, they are disentitled from claiming the benefit of the lowest pay-scale applicable to the regular employees. Therefore, according to the learned Government Pleader, the impugned order deserves to be set aside by this Court.