I.S. Israni, J. - (1.) In this writ petition apart from other prayers, it has been claimed that the petitioner is entitled to get salary in the pay-scale of Legal Assistant in accordance with the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed on March 27, 1983 (Annexure-2) as Legal Assistant/Advisor in the Office of respondent No. 1, Rajasthan Board of Muslim Wakfs (for the sake of brevity 'Wakf Board') for a period of one year on fixed remuneration of Rs. 600/- per month. The services of the petitioner were terminated on May 7/26, 1987 whereupon the petitioner filed a D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1353/1987 challenging the order of termination. The writ petition was allowed on January 5, 1988 and the order of termination was quashed as a result of the writ petition, petitioner was reinstated in service. The petitioner was confirmed with immediate effect vide order dated February 17, 1988 (Annexure-4). After confirmation, it is alleged by the petitioner that he made a verbal demand in the last week of April, 1988 for payment of salary in regular grade of Legal Assistant paid by Government of Rajasthan as all other employees of the Wakf Board were getting their salary in the regular grades which are paid by the Government of Rajasthan as per resolution of the Wakf Board dated May 21, 1974. By this resolution, the petitioner (sic Wakf Board) decided for grant of regular grade of Government employees to the employees of the Wakf Board. This resolution has been reproduced in para 12 of the petition. Thereafter, a notice for demand of justice dated May 9, 1988 (Annexure-6) was also given to the Wakf Board, but with no effect.
(3.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Shri G.S. Singhvi, learned counsel for the respondents that the Wakf Board is not instrumental of State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is, therefore, not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The learned counsel cited several Sections of Wakf Act, 195 and Rajasthan Muslim Wakfs Regulations 1964 and stressed that the funds of the Wakf Board are not controlled by the Government and the Government neither given any grant nor makes available the finance to the Board. It does not have any control in the day to day functioning of the Wakf Board and is, therefore, not even an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The Government appoints only Secretary and Members of the Wakf Board the Wakf Board does not carry out any sovereign functions or constitutional obligation of the Government. It is submitted that the Wakf Board has been created only with a view to look after the charitable properties which is not a State function. The learned counsel cited example of Nathdwara temple Act in support of his contention. It is also submitted that Corporations are created by Government to perform public functions which are otherwise performed by the State and cited examples of Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Food Corporation of India, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation etc. The learned counsel placed reliance on Ishaq Mohammad etc. v. Jaipur Metals & Electricals Ltd. (1988 (1) RLR 157) in which tests circumstances for determining whether a Corporation Society/Company is an instrumentality of State have been discussed in details. The learned counsel also referred to Mohd. Abbas Khan v. Bal Bhavan Board, New Delhi & ors. (1981 (3) SLR 407 in which Delhi High Court held that Bal Bhavan and National Children's Museum, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 was an instrumentality of State, as the society was established by a resolution of the Union of India and the Board consists of Chairman and four representatives of the Government of India and also some other members of other authorities. The Rules and Regulations are also made by the Board of Management, but are to be subject to approval of the Government of India. In Sukhdev Singh and ors. v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvansbi and Anr. (AIR 1975 SC 1331) , it was held by the Apex Court that Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Life Insurance Corporation and Industrial Finance Corporation are 'authorities' within Article 12 as Rules and Regulations framed by these statutory Corporations have force of law and that these Corporations are carrying on business of public importance.;