Smt. Rajvanteen Yadav v. Union Of India
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 235 of 2017
1. Smt. Rajvanteen Yadav W/o Shri Kejuram, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
2. Smt. Malti Yadav, W/o Panchu, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Smt. Kumari Sahu W/o Shri Jatiram, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
4. Smt. Nembati Sahu, W/o Shri Dhanaram, Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
5. Smt. Mangra Sahu, W/o Shri Chaitram, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
6. Smt. Vimla Sahu, W/o Late Shri Santu, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Barouda, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
7. Smt. Draupati Bai Sahu, W/o Shri Chandu Lal, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Kapsada, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
8. Smt. Hemlata Vishwakarma, W/o Shri Arun, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Kapsada, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
9. Smt. Triveni Nishad W/o Santosh, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Kapsada, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India Through : 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 : Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Directorate, School Education, Through : The Director, School Education, Shiksha Parisar, Pension Bada, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
4. Block Education Officer, Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
5. Government Boys Middle School, Mandhar, Through : The Head Master, Government Boys Middle School, Mandhar, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
6. Government Girls Middle School, Mandhar, Through : The Head Master, Government Girls Middle School, Mandhar, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
7. Government Primary School , Nilja, Through : The Head Master, Government Primary School, Nilja, Block Dharsiwa, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
8. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 1 : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, ASG For Respondent No. 2 to 8 : Shri Prafull N. Bharat, Additional Advocate General.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 1 7 / 0 1/201 (1) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working on the post of Cook in the various Government Schools and they are being paid only Rs.1200/- per month i.e. Rs.40/- per day, whereas according to the notification Annexure P/2, minimum wages prescribed by the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wage, she is entitled for Rs.255/- per day as they skilled labour. He would rely 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.
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"
(2) In view of above, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner 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. (3) With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.
Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge D/-