RATTAN LAL Vs. LT GOVERNORS
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)Counsel for the parties are agreed that these cases are squarely covered by a decision of this court in Writ Petition Nos. 9609-10 of 1983, titled Niadar v. Delhi Administration decided on 29/09/1988. In terms thereof thus, we direct the Delhi Administration to absorb the petitioners in accordance with the prepared scheme for absorbing casual labourers, which scheme has been made effective from 1/10/1988. In terms of the scheme, any casual labourer who has worked for one year or more in the Horticulture Department shall be regularised within six months with effect from 1/10/1988 if such casual labourer is otherwise fit to be regularised under the scheme as regular employee. On that footing each casual labourer working in the department shall get salary or wages at the rate equivalent to the minimum salary paid to a regular employee in comparable post in the Horticulture Department.
(2.)Learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the expression 'salary or wages' used in Niadar case and which has been used instantly also has given rise to a doubt in the department as to whether on regularisation minimum wage is to be paid or minimum salary to the regular employee, and on that doubt Rs. 750. 00 per month instead of rs. 1,100. 00 per month has been paid to some of the employees. Learned counsel for the Delhi Administration disputes this fact and says that it was always meant and always shall mean that minimum salary plus' allowances which come up to about Rs. 1,100. 00 has been paid to such employees and is otherwise payable. This clarifies the doubt expressed. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of in these terms. No costs.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.