IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 562 OF 2007 (SS) Smt. Vinita Balmiki ………..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ……..Respondents. Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand / respondents. 20th October, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand / respondents. The petitioner, by means of present writ petition, has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to provide the petitioner with a minimum of pay-scale, which is admissible to a daily-wage employee. The case of the petitioner is that she has been working in Gadarpur Tehsil for the last more than 16 years but she is not being paid even minimum wages. Hence, the present writ petition. However, in the counter affidavit, the State has denied this contention of the petitioner and has stated that the petitioner was never given any appointment or engagement by the tehsil authorities. The petitioner does the work on her own and is not entitled for any wages, definitely minimum wages as is being claimed. There is no document filed with the writ petition, which shows that the petitioner was given any appointment by the district or tehsil authorities as is 2 being claimed. In absence of any documents the petitioner has little to substantiate her case. The petitioner has, however, relied upon a note, which is given at Annexure SA-1 to the Supplementary Affidavit, which shows that she has been working from 11 to 12 years in the tehsil, though the State authorities before this Court by means of a Supplementary Counter Affidavit have stated that such certificate was wrongly given and the official who gave this note was given a warning and departmental proceedings were also initiated against the concerned Clerk, who has issued such a certificate/note. In view of these facts, there is no good ground for interference by this Court in the present case. However, since a representation of the petitioner for grant of minimum wages is pending before the district authority, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously. The writ petition is dismissed. No orders as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 20.10.2009 Rathour