Smt. Shail Devi Kurrey v. Union Of India
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6615 of 2016
1. Smt. Shail Devi Kurrey Wd/o Late Shri Ajay Kurrey, Aged About 39 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
2. Smt. Hema Bai Patre W/o Shri Madan Kumar Patre, Aged About 42 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Smt. Bhagtin Bai Patil W/o Shri Raju Patil Aged About 34 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
4. Smt. Shakuntala @ Shakun Patil W/o Shri Rajendra Patil, Aged About 29 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
5. Smt. Bharti Bai Manikpuri W/o Shri Bharat Das Manikpuri, Aged About 34 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
6. Smt. Mayavati Patel W/o. Shri Kamal Patel, Aged About 23 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
7. Smt. Ramtula Sahu W/o Shri Balram Sahu, Aged About 54 Years R/o Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod) Tahsil Arang, 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, Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
5. Government Middle School, Riko, Through : The Head Master, Government Middle School, Riko Block Arang, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
6. Government Primary School, Riko, Through : The Head Master, Government Primary School, Riko Block Arang, (Center Navagaon) District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
7. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District
Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :
Mr.Sourabh Sharma, Advocate For State :
Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy.G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 05/12/2016 1.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner are working on the post of Cook in the Government Middle School, Riko 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, they are entitled for Rs.255/- per day as they are 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. 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.
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/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE L/-