IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3200 of 2010 a/w CWP Nos. 3201,3213,3215, 3216 & 3217 of 2010. Date of decision: 29.3.2011. CWP No.3200 of 2010. Keshav Ram …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. CWP No. 3201 of 2010. Dharanidhar …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. CWP No. 3213 of 2010. Dev Raj …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. CWP No. 3215 of 2010. Ghanshyam …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. CWP No. 3216 of 2010. Bhuri Singh …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. CWP No. 3217 of 2010. Harish Kumar …Petitioner. Versus State of HP & Others. …Respondents. : 2 : Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioners: Mr. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate (in all the cases.) For respondent No.1: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. AG. (in all the cases.) For the respondent No.2. Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate (in all the cases.) For the respondent No.3. Mr. Rakesh Chandel, Advocate (in all the cases.) Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral). 1. All these six petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment, since identical questions of law and fact are involved in the same. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they are manning the check posts maintained by the H.P. State Agriculture Marketing Board and the Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee-respondent No.2 at various places. The case of the petitioners is that they not only stop the vehicles at the check posts, but also check the goods being carried and make entries in the register and collect the requisite market fees and thereafter deposit the same in the bank. They therefore claim that they are 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. doing clerical work and should be paid the daily wages of a clerk and they are being exploited and paid minimum daily wages paid to the labourers. 3. This Court had called for the record especially the cash and accounts register of the check posts and it is found that these cash and accounts registers are being maintained by the petitioners. Not only do they maintain the cash and accounts register, after collecting the fees, they are depositing the same in the banks also. This cannot be said to be labour/unskilled work by any stretch of imagination. This is clerical work. Therefore the petitioners are entitled to be paid the minimum daily wages payable to a clerk. 4. Therefore, the petitions are allowed and the respondent No.2-Board is directed to pay to the petitioners daily wages as payable to the clerks w.e.f. 1st July, 2007 i.e. three years prior to the filing of the present petitions. This amount be paid to the petitioners on or before 31st August, 2011, failing which the respondent-Board shall also be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date when this amount fell due. As far as the prayer for regularization is concerned, the respondents may consider their case(s) in accordance with law and take a decision on or before 30.11.2011. No costs. March 29, 2011. ( Deepak Gupta ) (Krn Guleria) Judge.