High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/709/2018disposed off

Ayodhya Singh Chandrawanshi v. C.G.State Of Power Distribution Comp.Ltd.

2018-03-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 709 of 2018

1. Ayodhya Singh Chandrawanshi S/o Kanak Chandrawanshi Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Kosmanda, Post Jhiraoni Tahsil Kawardha Police Station Pipariya District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

2. Anil Kumar Namdev S/o Shri Prakash Kumar Aged About 38 Years R/o Village And Post Indauri Tahsil Kawardha Police Station Pipariya District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

3. Rajesh Kumar Kaushik S/o Shri Shiv Kumar Kaushik Aged About 32 Years R/o Village And Post Gochhiya Tahsil And Police Station S/ Lohara District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

4. Gangaram Kaushik S/o Shri Ganeshram Kaushik Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Danighatholi, Post Gochhiya Tahsil And Police Station S/lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

5. Lukesh Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Aalam Singh Sahu Aged About 38 Years C/o S. K. Jaiswal , Main Road Silhati Tahsil , And Police Station - S/ Lohara District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. C.G. State Of Power Distribution Comp.Ltd. Through Managing Director Dangniya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Executive Director ( O And M ) C S P D C L Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. J B S Enterprises ( Contactor ) 9 B-2 Vindhavav Society Thana West Mumbai - 400601, District : Mumbai, Maharashtra ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri KPS Gandhi, Advocate For Respondents :

Shri Manish Nigam, Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board

-208/03/2018 Heard.

1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is being disposed off finally.

2. The petitioners by way of this petition seek a direction to the respondents for paying salary at par with the regular employees in the department on the basis of "Equal Pay For Equal Work". The petitioners rely upon the judgment of Supreme Court in case State of Punjab & Jagjit Singh and Others, (2017) 1 SCC 148.

3. However, a perusal of record shows that the petitioners, till date, have not made any representation to the employer for redressal of their grievances. Without representation being made to the employer for redressal of grievance, this petition, at this juncture, would be premature and the same is declined from being entertained. However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the respondents by making a detailed representation in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in case of State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh (Supra). In case such a representation is made, it is expected that the authorities concerned shall look into the matter and pass appropriate orders in accordance with rules. The petitioners are at liberty to re-agitate, if situation so warrants.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen