1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.159/1999. : : Smt. Laxmi Devi Vs. State & Ors. : : Date of Order 10.7.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Kapil Sharma for Mr.S.K.Gupta for the petitioner. Mr.Tarun Choudhary for Mr.Hanuman Choudhary for the respondents. Ms.Parinitoo Jain, Dy.Govt.Counsel, for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Laxmi Devi with the prayer that respondents be directed to regularise her services on the post of Sweeper and provide her salary in the regular pay scale on the basis of equal pay for equal work. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that she was initially appointed as Sweeper in the month of July, 1989 on daily wages basis at Ayurvedic Hospital, Dholpur. Her services were terminated on 2.4.1990. Thereafter a reference was made to the Labour Court, Bharatpur at her instance by the appropriate Government. The Labour Court passed an award on 28.10.1992 holding 2 that the petitioner be reinstated in services with full back wages. The said award was challenged before this Court by the State Government by way of filing writ petition, which was dismissed. The respondents did not reinstate the petitioner in service and also did not pay her back wages. She has to thereafter file application under Section 15 (2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 which was allowed by the Authority vide order dated 15.7.1994 directing them to pay back wages within 30 days. An appeal preferred by the respondents against the said order passed by the Payment of Wages Authority which was dismissed by the District Judge, Dholpur vide his judgment dated 3.6.1995. It was thereafter that back wages of petitioner were paid and she was allowed to join duties on 12.2.1996. Still the respondents are paying to her a meager sum of Rs.1300/- per month whereas she is required to work as Sweeper. It is argued that writ petition be allowed in terms of the prayers. The writ petition opposed by the respondents and submitted that engagement of the petitioner was made only on part time basis. Initially she was paid Rs.2 per day for sanitation work in the office of the respondents. There is neither any post or budget for regularising service of the petitioner as Sweeper. Her services, therefore, cannot be 3 regularised. Presently the petitioner is being paid a sum of Rs.44/- per month as part time worker as approved by the State Government. Direction for regularisation and for payment of salary in regular pay scale in the absence of duly sanctioned post cannot be issued. Even though the claim of the petitioner for regularisation and payment of regular salary is resisted by the respondents stating that the there is no sanctioned post and, therefore, no budget but the fact that the petitioner has been working as Sweeper for them for last last several years in Government Ayurvedic Hospital, Dholpur and in the Office of Ayurvedic Officer, is not in dispute. Even after subsequent reinstatement of the petitioner in 1996, she has worked for almost 12 years and all this time she is not being paid even the minimum wages as unskilled labour as prescribed by the State Government. Contention that she is being paid for her work as part time employee cannot be accepted because work of cleaning and sweeping of two Offices are being done by the petitioner alone on regular basis and she has been continuously working, has not been disputed even by the respondents. Payment of wages treating her to be a part time worker, therefore, cannot be justified. At the same time, 4 for want of sanction of regular sanctioned post claiming for regular pay scale cannot be accepted. In the fact and circumstances of the case, the respondents ought to be paid the petitioner the minimum wages as prescribed by the State Government for an unskilled labour. In the result, the writ petition is partly allowed and the respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner minimum wages as unskilled labour revised from time to time. Arrear of such wages paid to the petitioner from the date of filing of the writ petition i.e. 19.1.1995 and for future the respondents should pay her minimum wages. It goes without saying that for payment of minimum wages, the petitioner would be required to discharge duties for normal office hours. The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.24.