THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL No:1072 OF 2001 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ appeal is preferred by the appellant aggrieved by an order, dated 29.12.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.13794 of 2000. The respondent herein is the writ petitioner. The relief sought for in the writ petition was to declare the action of the respondents therein in not regularizing the services of the writ petitioner as Class IV Employee and not extending the benefit of time scale of pay sanctioned through proceedings No.B.III/17787/99, dated 6.10.1999 on par with the other similarly situated employees, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents therein to regularize the services of the writ petitioner and also pay the regular time scale of pay with all consequential benefits. The learned Single Judge having regard to the statement made by the respondents-authorities in their counter that proposals were sent to the Government vide proceedings dated 9.4.1999, in which the name of the writ petitioner was also included and the approval is yet to be received from the Government and therefore, her case cannot be considered at this point of time for regularization, disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents-authorities to pay the minimum of the pay scale attached to the post of the petitioner till her services are regularized and after regularization, her case may be considered in accordance with law for time scale. Having aggrieved by the same, the respondents-authorities filed the present appeal. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the material available on record. As can be seen from the material on record, it is apparent that in pursuance of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.11742 of 1994, the writ petitioner was appointed as casual labour on compassionate grounds and she joined duty on 9.1.1996 and since then, she has been working as NMR casual labour, but minimum of the pay scale is not being paid to her. It is further apparent that casual labourers, who are working on regular basis are entitled for the minimum of the pay-scale attached to the post, but they may not be entitled for the time scale till their services are regularized. According to the authorities, the proposals as to the regularization of the labourers are pending with the Government. It is the contention of the learned Standing Counsel that the writ petitioner is not entitled to claim minimum of the time scale pending consideration of the proposals before the Government for regularization and extension of benefits of time scale of pay sanctioned through proceedings dated 6.10.1999. Perusal of the proceedings dated 6.10.1999 goes to show that the TTD specified authority while according sanction for adoption of Revised Pay Scales, 1999 to the officers and Employees of TTD in its resolution dated 7.4.1994, has also accorded approval for extension of the minimum of time scales i.e., RS.2550-4550 besides other allowances admissible in the Revised Pay Scales, 1999 to NMRs/Volunteers and Unit Workers (unabsorbed) working in TTD, who are now drawing the minimum of time scale in Revised pay Scales, 1993 and the monetary shall be allowed from 1.4.1999. It also goes to show that the authorities are directed to implement the orders accordingly to the NMRs/Volunteers and Unit Workers (unabsorbed) etc., working under their respective control. There is no material placed before this Court that the said resolution was revoked. While placing reliance on the above resolution, the learned Counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner contended that the petitioner is entitled to minimum of time scales. We see some force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner and therefore, We are of the opinion that the writ petitioner is entitled to the minimum of time scales viz., Rs.2550-4550 in pursuance of the resolution dated 6.10.1999 from today, if it is not already done. In all other aspects, the findings of the learned Single Judge need no interference by this Court. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ____________________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 15th July, 2008 Nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL No:1072 OF 2001 (JUDGMENT delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 15.7.2008