← Library
Madras High CourtWP/32422/2022disposed of

M.Vadivelu v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2022-12-01Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01.12.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

1. M. Vadivel

2. S. Vishnu

3. K. Karthick

4. R. Manikandan

5. U. Manikandan

6. E. Yadhender Ezhilarasan

7. R. Thiyagarajan

8. V. Santhosh Sivan

...Petitioners

vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. By its Principal Secretary, Fort. St. George, Chennai - 9.

2. The Chief Engineer (General) and Engineer in Chief, WRO, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

3. The Executive Engineer, WRO, Kosasthalaiar Basin Division, Thiruvallur.

...Respondents

1/6

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners herein for grant of minimum time scale of pay of Rs.18,500/- per mensum applying equal pay for equal work under Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India and as had been granted and extended in favour of similarly placed persons as per G.O. Ms. No.233, Public Works Department, dated 06.12.2019 on the basis of the collective representation dated 12.10.2020 on merits and as per law.

For petitioners : Mr. L. Chandrakumar For respondents : Mr.P. Ganesan, Government Advocate

ORDER

By consent of both the parties, this writ petition has been taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. Mr.P.Ganesan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

3. This writ petition has been filed seeking for consolidated pay of Rs.18,500/- p.m to each of the petitioners as per the minimum time scale of pay fixed under G.O.Ms.No.233 Public Works Department dated 06.12.2019.

2/6

4. The petitioners claim that they have been working as NMRs/Daily rated Casual Labourers for several years. According to the petitioners, by G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019 referred to supra, payment of wages to 3407 Nominal Muster Rolls/Daily rated Casual Labourers was fixed on consolidated basis at Rs.18,500/-per month. According to the petitioners, similarly placed persons were granted consolidated pay of Rs.18,500/- in terms of G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019. However, the petitioners have been omitted arbitrarily. The petitioners contend that they have been receiving only Rs.15,500/- per month each and G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019 has not been applied to them. In such circumstances, they have given a joint representation on 12.10.2020 to the respondents requesting them to pay them a consolidated pay of Rs.18,500/-per month each as is being done to the similarly placed persons by applying G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019. Since the representation of the petitioners has not been considered earlier, they have filed this writ petition.

5. Heard Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P.Ganesan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

6. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 3/6

would submit that the petitioners were not engaged at any time in the offices of the third respondent. They also deny the contentions of the petitioners that they are still continuing to be under the employment of the third respondent. They also contend that G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019 does not apply to the petitioners.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the respective petitioners shall produce all the documentary evidence before the respondents as and when their joint representation, seeking for payment of consolidated monthly pay of Rs.18,500/- each is considered on merits and in accordance with law.

8. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioners' joint representation dated 12.10.2020 seeking for payment of consolidated monthly pay of Rs.18,500/-each is considered on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

9. The petitioners claim that similarly placed persons were granted a consolidated monthly pay of Rs.18,500/- by applying G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 06.12.2019 referred to supra and the petitioners also claim that there must be equal pay for equal work and according to them, there cannot be any discrimination as the similarly placed persons who have been paid 4/6

higher consolidated pay of Rs.18,500/- per month are also doing the very same work done by the petitioners.

10. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the respondents 1 and 2 to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioners' joint representation dated 12.10.2020 seeking for payment of consolidated monthly pay of Rs.18,500/- each as was done to the similarly placed persons, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

11. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

01.12.2022 (1/2) Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order vsi2 To

1. The Principal Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu Fort. St. George, 5/6

Chennai - 9.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vsi2

2. The Chief Engineer (General) and Engineer in Chief, WRO, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

3. The Executive Engineer, WRO, Kosasthalaiar Basin Division, Thiruvallur.

01.12.2022 (1/2) 6/6