IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1323 (S/S) of 2007 Vikram Singh S/o Sri Bhim Singh R/o Village Chopra Post Dewal District Uttarkashi. ………Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through the Principal Secretary Forest Department Government of Uttarakhand Dehradun. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest Uttarakhand, Rajpur Road Dehradun. 3. Conservator of Forest, Yamuna Circle 86, Rajpur Road, Dehradun. 4. Divisional Forest Officer, Upper Yamuna Forest Division Barkot District Uttarkashi. ……Respondents. Shri P.C. Jhingan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the minimum wages to the petitioner, as provided in G.O. No. 1794 (3)/VIII/228-Je Vh0lh0@2001 dated 18.10.2005. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner is Leesa Chowkidar with the Forest Department and is engaged on daily wages. The Said fact is admitted in the counter affidavit. 4. The dispute relates to the rate of wages applicable to the Leesa Chowkidar. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to annexure-1 to the writ petition, which is copy of letter No. 1257/10-3 (n0J0), Dehradun, dated 14.12.2006, which provides that the monthly amount payable to the daily wage workers, who are engaged in making logs and other timber works, is paid Rs. 2830/- + Rs. 200/- = Rs. 3030/- per month (under Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for the hilly area). However, learned counsel for the respondents argued that said communication and the order dated 18.10.2005, are not applicable to the petitioner, as the petitioner is neither engaged in making logs nor for the timber works. 6. Learned Standing Counsel drew attention of this Court to annexure-C.A. 1 to the counter affidavit, and contended that the petitioner who is a Leesa Chowkidar, is entitled to Rs. 73/- per day, as daily wages, as provide in G.O. No. 933/XI/05/58 (45)/2004, dated 19.01.2006, read with order dated 28.09.2006 issued by Conservator of Forest. 7. It is not the petitioner’s claim that he is engaged in logging work or for timber work, rather his case is that he is Leesa Chowkidar, as such, it cannot be said that the order dated 18.10.2005, read with the order of Chief Conservator of Forest dated 14.12.2006, (copy annexure- 1 to the writ petition) is applicable to the petitioner for The purposes of payment of wages. However, there is no reason on the part of the respondents to deny the petitioner wages at the rate of Rs. 73/- per day, as provided in G.O. 933/XI/05/58 (45)/2004, dated 19.01.2006, read with order dated 28.09.2006 of the Conservator of Forest, Yamuna Circle, Dehradun, which is admittedly payable to all the daily wage workers engaged by the Forest Department. The stand of respondents themselves is that the petitioner is entitled to wages at said rate. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not being paid even that amount and still being paid Rs. 1740/- per month. 8. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall be paid daily wages at the rate of Rs. 73/- per day i.e. Rs. 2190/- per month, if the same is not being paid to him, till the rates are further revised in future. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 04.01.2008 S