Gopi Ram and Others vs The State of Rajasthan and Others

Mohammad Rafiq, J.—Heard learned Counsel for Petitioners.

By this writ petition, Petitioners are seeking similar benefit as has been granted by this Court in Writ Petition No. 487/2009 - Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. - disposed of on 20.01.2009.

Case of Petitioners is that they were appointed on post of Beldar under Respondents and their services were terminated illegally; they raised industrial disputes and learned Labour Court, vide its awards dated 31.2.1997 in case of Petitioner No. 1, dated10.07.1997 in case of Petitioners No. 2, 3 and 4, and dated 19.07.1995 in case of Petitioner No. 5, declared their termination of services as illegal and unjustified and they were ordered to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and other consequential benefits.

Subsequently, Petitioner No. 1 was declared semi-permanent with effect from 01.02.1991, Petitioner No. 2 with effect from 01.08.1989, Petitioner No. 3 with effect from 01.08.1989 and Petitioner No. 4 with effect from 01.08.1989 and Petitioner No. 5 with effect from 02.03.1989, but their pay had been notionally fixed on 31.12.1997 and they were granted actual benefit of pay scale from 01.01.1998.

Counsel for Petitioners submits that since Awards were passed by Labour Court in favour of respective Petitioners for their reinstatement in service with continuity of service and all consequential benefits, therefore, their cases would be covered. Counsel placed reliance on judgment of this Court in Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (Supra), wherein a direction fro filing representation was given.

Counsel stated at bar that subsequently, the representation submitted by Petitioner Murari Lal in Writ Petition No. 487/2009 has been accepted, therefore, similar directions may be issued in present case.

I have gone through record of writ petition and further considered submissions of counsel for Petitioners.

Before proceeding further, it is relevant to reproduce operative portion of aforesaid judgment in Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra). The same is as under:

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that a Circular dated 04.03.1998 was issued by the Finance Department with regard to work charge employees. The said circular provided that the pay fixation of the work charge employees will be made effective on notional basis from the date when they declared semi permanent and they''re entitled to receive actual monetary benefits with effect from 01.01.1998.

It is further contended that the Petitioner is also entitled to get consequential benefits, viz., pay fixation, seniority from the date when he was declared semi permanent status but under the barb of said circular, the Petitioner has not been given the benefit of the same.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by learned Counsel for the Petitioner and carefully perused the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in SBCWP No. 6927/2005 and Circular dated 04.03.1998. The Petitioner is required to represent before the Respondents and Respondents are expected to consider the case of the Petitioner for grant of actual benefits from the date semi permanent status was given and if the Petitioner''s case is found in order, the consequential benefits be granted to him.

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of as indicated herein above.

In my view, where the Labour Court has passed Award with direction for reinstatement all consequential benefits, that has to be decided as per the direction of the Labour Court.

The prayer made by learned Counsel for Petitioners for permitting Petitioners to file representation appears to be reasonable. In case the Petitioners submit any representation, then the same will be decided within a period of two months from the date of receipt thereof.

Writ petition is disposed of as indicated above.