d V£WW 03 V"r IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI’SGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NO.31 S O OF 2004 Smt. Munni Bai, : PETITIONER W/o.Shri Harlal Raikumar, Aged about 48 years, Rio. Near Brahaspati Bazar, BILASPUR(C.G_.) VERSUS — I V‘ ‘“ ‘ ? ‘a " . 1) State of Chhattisgarh, Through, the Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Depaftment, (Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe Development) District - Raipur (C.G.) 2) The COllector, RESPONDENTS District - Bllaspur (C.G.) 3) The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, (Schedule Cast & Schedule Tribe Development) Near Collectorate, Bilaspur. (C.G.) '4) The Additional Collector, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) x (7 l"; Tg i‘ WRIT PETITION CGI‘I UNDER TITHTIGH ARTICLE OF IHDIA 226 & 22? QF THE XI--7 HC8 §m$ ‘ .’ \. .,- ... ..... 200 W Lo p w 3\S’0/w m?tq%?<$di§?a) rmmmma ‘ v WW %W ¥ r $Wm§1 9.9.2005 Petitioner by Shri Yqgesh Pandey, Advocate. Respondents by Shr'L Bhaskar Pyasi, Panel lawyer. Heard. ' Learned counsel for thew petiiioner submits that the peu'tjoner was appointed on‘daily wages as Safai Kamgar (Saki Kérmkchafi} vide Older dated 1.3.1997 ‘(Annexme P/ 2) and ever since the petitioner has been working. By oral order, the petitioner Was directe to Work at Bagdeva Balak Ashram as Cook, and presently s e is working as Cook théreat. The petitioner was appointed f n daily wages, axed by the Collector, and by order dated 8.9.2 02 (Annexure P/4) the daily wages of Rs. ‘ 67.87 was nx for‘ Safaiv Karmachari (unskilled worker). According to t paying wages‘nxed by the Collector, though the petitioner was ‘ appointed on ;dai1y Wages The petitioner has the Constitntion ’ of respondents for payme Collector rateimentioned made in the: petition to regularize the Services of the petitioner on the post of soia i.e. Cook is" not maintainable as there is no order or working as Cook.‘ e petitioner the respondents are not h f a e d I n sis as Safai Kannachari. d this petition under Article 226' of ia seeldng relief against the of salary to the petitioner as per ‘Annexure P[4. Thé second prayer i a d XI-HC~78 mm aim'm . ........ ”gm/W ‘ 111200 311??!W (W) mmm mar a 1 ~ mma-wlmxi asmanaw » :ounsel for the respondents submit .ent, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, by order :1 26th December, 2001 has imposed x a ban on all appointmenth, therefore, it was decided to pay an to the petitioner as monthly wages. Mr. Pyasi, leaxned t that thé Finance Deparhr dated Annexurc R/ 1 date: amount of Rs. 300/— p.111. After hearing 1e ed counsel for: the parties and perusing the records, it i established that the peh'u'oner was appointed way back 1997 as ‘daily wages employee. Thereafter the petition r has been continuing as Safai Karmachari. Accolding t learnea counsel foxj the petitioner, " she was direeted orally o work as Cook, but the petitioneli has not placed any document on r’eCoxd to prove that the petitioner was directed to work as Cook. Since the petiu'oner was appointed as ‘Safai Kamiachari on daily wages nxed by the Collector time to time, the soicalled ban imposed by order dated 26. 12.2001 Annexure R/ 1 is‘not applicable to the case of the petitioner as she has been working since 1.3. 1997. The decision of the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 300/- as the daily wagers are paid on the by the Collector and not on the r dated 8.9.2002 Annexule P/4 clearly determines the wages Rs. 67.87 (applicable in the case of the petitionr) for the period hom 1.4.2002 to 30.9.2002 and Rs. 644. 6 for the period hon; 1.10.2001 to 31.3.2002. ' / w; a d e ? ‘ y e p.111. is Without any basi basis of daily wages, monthly basis. The‘v o s p3 P W 3 LVDIW mmmm ...’..’....* 311wm (W) 200 “ :- :‘ >mmm max mm#wm $Wamm ‘ Pgomg, the petltton 1s allowed and the d to pay back wages to tho pemmner er dated 8.9.2002 (Annexum P] 4). for the peu'tioner submits that the any payment either 'on' daily wages or ‘on monthly bas1s mm November, 2001 The mspondents are _ duectefi to venfy and ’ Collector mm Nove months. The petition is agoordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ‘ Certihed copy, as x 'InfVieW of the for mspoildents are direc as préscribéd in the 0nd Learned émmsey ‘petltloner ls not gelLm e payment of wages as hxed by the er, * 2001 Within a period of three