A IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR [WRIT JURISDICTION] WRIT PETITION NO/^^OF 2001 IN THE WIATTER OF : LEEDGA RAM SAHU S/o Shri Phool Singh Sahu Aged about 55 years, Village - Ahilda, P.0. Lawan, Tahsil - Baloda Bazar, Distt. - Raipur [C.G.] PETITIONER VERSUS ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Secretary Water Resources Department, Secretariat, Raipur {C.G.} 2. ChiefEngineer Mahanadi Project, Water Resources Department, Raipur {C.G.} 3. ExecutiveEngineer, Water Resources Division No. 2 Raipur 4. Subdivislonal Officer, Water Manafement Subdivision No. 6 Baloda Bazar, District; Raipur To, The Hon'ble ChiefJustice and His Companion Justices ofthe Hon'ble High Courtof Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. RESPONDENTS ^•^'"'s^1^'. ^ PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE Sa-V-^^ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC- 78 vfiwn g>Mi<*> ^s^ "41'41d'4, »fll'M'i<o, fs(i?iiy'j,< ^....^.:...P...U°.:.i^^ sn^Ti 'tH^ (tci(a««i.<i) swnw ft-fi* T^T 3H^?T th^i^i r ". 5«tT*sR^rfiff ^^W 29-9-2004 Petitioners through tlieir re| State by Shri V.V.S. Murtlty Heard. 2. Tnis batch of cases relate t^ Resources Department. Since fhe similaRi.they are being decided by 3. Counsel for 'petitioner sub^iits iv deals with Accounts of W| Registration and Paynient of D4i Para 4.003 reads thus:- 4.003(A) • Casual Labo' casi^al labour gangs, the < roil,' •w'iuch will shovv tlie the /vvork done and the amc rol^s ifnecessary- may be c: (B^) Permanept Gangs- (a) ... ... ... (b) ,.. ... ... .(c) ... ... ... (d) ... .., ... (e) Aiiy recmitmeiit to ri pen-nission 01 S.E. Uib< employed'conTmued in 4l<lf('l41"l iw^ ^ felzt <fat<r ^sTfirasm^i spective counsel. Dv. Advocate General. Gangnian, Chokidar etc. oftlie Water ^uestion involved m all flie petitions is this common order. that P.W.D. Manual. Volume 1 Chapter brks and Stores. Fara 4.003 deais vvith (ily Casual Lahour,/Regular Labour Gaiigs. \a Gangs- When work is to be done by daily lubordmate incharge shall prepare a muster ^iames ofthe work-people; their attendance, |unt payable on this account. Monthly muster |osed after seven days'or as convemem. giilar gangs: will be done only with tlie lu-ers more than 58 vears ofase shall not be egular gangs." :;-hC—7S awnwtew ':<V 311^1 aiiiqi pHBaiii '3'^ •<<i<ii<'iAi, yTil'y'is, tsKniyy HI*ICTI ^tji^, ••"••'•••••—••—-—•--•^ 200 3iA?iTrasF (yi(i<i<yi) ?<fl]W ^ftil SS^ 4. It is subtnitted that tlieij submitted that by a notification, is no change iu the Maiiual. He fartiier i^ianual caimotbe superseded. 5. • . Cuuiis!;I fbr petitioika su4mtt.;dthai.tiit. as, per aMiexure P--. (Vv.P. No. 2044/2004), flie Additional Sec|-etar\' vide letter dated 9-3-2000 bearing no. F/13/11/S/2000 has issued direl should not be allowed to work.1 refereace to the above letter, tfi^ employees vide its letter dated t;tlon that the daily wage employees/labours on attauiing more Ihan 55 years of age. Iii Govemm.ent-has clarified flie categon' oftlie fc-7-2000 bearing no. F/13/ll,'31/Sa/2000 as it was made clear that the ordei) daily wag? employees andthey) Counsel Qs petitioner submitte4 on.a~decyion in Union oflndia Madhva Pradesh and others -v- 2003 was ako brought to tfie aot] <1>1«[<"<<4|-< lllfil' 4 'fe'zt <fa<^l<. ^iT-STRWSTI^T per Amiexure P-3 .'that the eniplcjyees who should not be allowed to vvork after 55 years are. I'.Chokidar (2) L^bour (unskilled), (3) Helper (unskilled), (4) Civil (5) Mali (6) Khalasi (7) G^ngman and (8) Process Surveyor. In the letter, under reference will not be applied on other inay be kept in service till 60 vears of age. that it is discrimmation. He'placed reliance nd another -v- Intemational Trading Co. Ltd. SCC 437 and State bfOrissa and ofliers -y- and'another reported in 2003 (5) Titagliur Paper Mills reported ^i AIK-1.985 SC 1293. Duringthe Course of hearingi the decision ofHigh C^urt ofM.P. in W.P. No. 3200/2003 CState_oi Sint. Bhaewati Bai and anothery dated 23-3- ce oftliis Court. issued directioiis that the order^ 6. Couiisel for petitioner jfi^rther submitted thatj the State Goveniinent . issued another direction vide let(er dated .L7-4-2000-as pa-Aanexure P-4 and directmg retirement ofemplovees ofVv'ater ^ ^^^'^^ ^••^' L XI-HC—78 1'IIE sn^i ^i liFnEp •ifnsfi^t'CTW '3^ "41'4M'4, »fll'M'l(o, facliuy . ]^^..^.lif./s.0.01.:....^. ^rewsR'Etra? '" "" """"""""""w^zoo Sff^T 'q^? ( Vl^yi) ?«tTW^lf^[ <HI^ Resources Department attamin^ submitted tiiat Departmeiit has submitted thaf thev have beenl 2000 (Armexure P-2) aiid subs| 2000 have not been considered. 7. Leamed D\'. Advocate (] -.decision taken bylhe State on /31/2004 wherebv the ap.e in as 60 years. The letter dated 16-] tlie age of55 years, are caiicelled. He further |not been fair iti removing tlie employees. He removed pursuant to notification dated 9-3- ^quent aottfication dated 17-4-2000 aiid 5-7- ]Fhere is not a-whisper in tlie order. ^eneral brought to the notice oftlie Court the i-8-2004 videletterbearuigno. F 14-53/ ^-TT. Water' Resources Department has been kept ^-2004 is qyoted below:- 1|6 ds ^^(q,.^.i.' 'cTwW ¥[^,-3^1^ 2000,T?TO5 09.03.1 ?f?T ^se c^, t3RP '^qiPl^Rh <fe 'fcP? Stfel^ . f 5 ^?R itpft ^ETT&J ^T[tTT ^STT ^)i'tri<?pi1'i ^w<^ ^T ^k^ tfs^x ^aiRiiTsn^r :''^^.tf^- ,te; ^ *^iRii)y/^(^ i^t ^rr. ,f;^^ ^sprier^.wsr^j WHT, ura ^Rnw f^M,ir^Rra, W3 -4_1Z31 / W / 2000. •giRfcjfr f^qzi •?[ feT,W%T t^ ^T OTcfer A Ar !W t f^ if?KR ^ 'tfr'fr ^iR^i ffl 3TTg ;tqT MRcT ^if IRft t '^CT^t •^;'^ TR te ^'i^vl^l ^•?T^t t i ^n w:w ww^ wi.'^ snqr? .'CR.'COTI'^T ^cT t i <iwi"ya: 55 q^ ^: sng ?t srfe .'^ .'^r A-fTiq» WMU^ "w, :^-.^^ ^'^^-^Rut^^.N^^'c&i'cZitotr ^ 55 M-c^ .Sil^ 'W ^R^ ^:^'^3^^ l^T^T t^ tra ST 1 ^^ ' .•.'-. ^^^sa;ir XI-HC—78 3?T<ST ^T Rfflcb ??TT <i<[^¥! ai^iq'i ^cho^-/- WWII th*11«h <iTi) "4l<4ld.i|,-®fl1.M<i<o,faciiyy _..M'f.^.9.^a60.'L- TR^200 31I^?r'q??T (1clt3««i4) ?«iisi<flfsa SII^T ^BT 5TWT ^T?T fl uiri' '^TBN^T f??qpT ^ 3TTg .•gqTRxTTgw? c|?|ijc|isi c]H] Flp?»!<?t STcpTTj' c!57T)1t j" 8. Counsel for the petitioner State Govenmient dated 16-8-20fl last para of the above order, th^ FuhKc'-Works Departsneiit the aj was earlier and afier talang'd immediatelv. The contention is decisioa and in spife ofthe decisio] 9. In view ofthe brder dafcc taken steps,aad arder? are requiij orders bepassed in aceordance v directed tha,t till orders are 10. Subiect to directions and c disposed Af. Coiisequently all o£ . ' \ ;. ! ^ 11. A/copy ofthis Courtbe pla 4*l<li<r1*ftT1 ^ft'TcT'f'^ fs^l ^<-$i< ^Tsifinan^i fS]Z[T TOT f ^i a1??aT'yrra i SRT: Ni'O'-KlTl ^fV 60 crf' ?ct cpt ^ *t4c||^ ^ 5TWT ^t liubinitted tliat inspite ofthis decision ofthe |4, the departinent has nottaken any step. Li State Govemment faas decided that ia the i^e ofsuperannuation'bekeptSOYearsas it jte.ps, the State Goyemmetit be isrfonnsd that now fe State Govemment has taken ji, they are not implementing tlie same. 16-8-2004, the Department ought to have ^d to^be passed by thfi Departttifint. Let the I'ithti-ie order dated 16-8-2004. It is further y&e-petitioriers be-allowedto contmue. jbservations made above, the petitions stand t^ie pending. M.W.Ps, andI.As. also staud pasged,^&&petit: :ed in all tlie coimected matters. V\,... Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge