Smt. Ankalin Bai Nag v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2806 of 2018

1. Smt. Ankalin Bai Nag W/o Late Shri Nakul Ram Nag, aged about 51 years working as Cook Primary School Awaspara Mandabharri Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

2. Than Singh Netam S/o Ranuram Netam, aged about 33 years working as Cook Middle School Gahrinbandha Block Narharpur, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

3. Smt. Tara Bai Salam W/o Maniram Salam, aged about 37 years working as Cook Primary School Daldali Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

4. Tikam Singh Uike S/o Fanit Ram Uike, aged about 36 years working as Cook, Middle School Gattagudum Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

5. Dular Singh Dhruw S/o Late Shri Ratanlal Dhruw, aged about 43 years working as Cook Primary School Bagrumpara (Gattagudum) Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

6. Bahur Ram Netam S/o Late Shri Sukhram Netam aged about 50 years working as Cook Primary School Nayapara Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

7. Kishan Lal Shori S/o Chintaram Shori aged about 26 years working as Cook, Primary School Mandabharri Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

8. Sirijram Netam S/o Veer Singh Netam aged about 38 years working as Cook Primary School Imlipara Bhimadih, Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

9. Pila Bai Salam W/o Tiharuram aged about 52 years working as Cook Primary School Kotalbhatti Block Narharpur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development Department of School Education and Literacy, Mid Day Meal Division, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

2. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Pension Bada, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Collector, Kanker, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

5. The District Education Officer, Kanker, District North Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

6. The Block Education Officer, Narharpur, District North Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents

For petitioners :

Shri Anurag Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 :

Shri Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Ashutosh Pandey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 04/04/2018 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are working as cook in different Government Schools in Block Narharpur, District North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.), however, their grievance is common that they are paid only Rs. 1200/- per month i.e. Rs. 40 per day as renumeration or salary, whereas according to the notification Annexure P-2 the minimum wages prescribed in the State of Chhattisgarh is Rs. 255 per day for skilled laboureres, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for such minimum wage.

2.

Counsel for the Petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Jagjit Singh & Ors., decided on 26th October, 2016, in which the Supreme Court has held that the principle of equal pay for equal work will also applicable to all the temporary employees and has been held as under:-

54. There is no room for any doubt, that the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' has emerged from an interpretation of different provisions of the Constitution. The principle has been expounded through a large number of judgments rendered by this Court, and constitutes law declared by this Court. The same is binding on all the courts in India, under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. The parameters of the principle, have been summarized by us in paragraph 42 hereinabove. The principle of 'equal pay for equal work' has also been extended

to temporary employees (differently described as workcharge, daily-wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the like). The legal position, relating to temporary employees, has been summarized by us, in paragraph 44 hereinabove. The above legal position which has been repeatedly declared, is being reiterated by us, yet again."

3.

In view of above, Respondent No. 2 is directed to consider the representations of the Petitioners in the light of aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law on its own merit. The petitioners are at liberty to make an additional representation, if any.

4.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Pawan JUDGE