G.S. Singhvi, J. - (1.) PETITIONER Sangh which is a registered Trade Union and which represents the employees of the Chambal Command Area Development, Kota, has filed this writ petition seeking relief of quashing of order dated 9 -1 -81 and 24 -8 -82 with a further claim for declaration that the employees whose names have been given in the Schedule -A are entitled to the benefits of the Rajasthan P.W.D. (B & R) including Gardens, Irrigation, Water Works and Ayurvedic Department Workcharged Employees Service Rules, 1964. It has further been prayed that the respondents may be directed to pay the arrears of salary to the members of the petitioner Sangh from the date they have completed 2 years service after being declared semi permanent.
(2.) THE petitioner has given list of its 129 members on whose behalf the petition has been filed. All the members of the petitioner Sangh are daily rated workers and nature of job performed by them brings them within the scope of the term workmen used in Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioner's case is that its members are employee of CAD Department. This department has two wings namely Irrigation and Agriculture. The rules of 1964 have been made applicable to the Irrigation Wing but those serving in Agriculture Wing are not being given the benefit of 1964 rules. On 12 -4 -79 the Government wrote a letter to the Area Development Commissioner, CAD Chambal, Kota that workcharged pay scales may be allowed with effect from 1 -1 -79 only to those employees who have completed two years of service or more on that day (i.e. 1 -1 -79). When the petitioner Sangh made a claim for allowing the benefit of workcharge pay scales to its members with effect from 1 -1 -79, the Area Development Commissioner wrote to the Financial Commissioner, Government of Rajasthan on 31 -3 -80 that the Government has issued clarification vide letter dated 12 -4 -79 allowing the workcharge pay scales with effect from 1 -1 -79 to those employees who have completed 2 years service or more on that day. He pointed out that there are two types of labourers working in the organisation, one belongs to Irrigation Wing and the other to the Agriculture Wing. According to the clarification of the Government employees belonging to both the wings of the department should be allowed workcharge pay scale. However, Rule 2 of 1964 rules does not apply to the employees of the Agriculture Wing of CAD Organisation. Thus the implementation of the decision of the Government has led to discontentment amongst the labourers of Agriculture Wing. He, therefore, requested that workcharge service rules may be suitably amended in order to extend the benefits of the labourers of Agriculture Wing. The Government then sought certain information from the Area Development Commissioner through letter dated 25 -4 -80. The point on which information was sought related to the question as to by which set of service rules of the workcharge employees of Agriculture Department are governed and whether workcharge employees of Agriculture Department are allowed workcharge pay scales applicable to engineering departments. The Area Development Commissioner wrote back on 14 -11 -80 that no workcharge service rules have been framed under the Agriculture Department and there is no provision for workcharge employees of Agriculture Department. He again requested for amendment of 1964 rules. The Commissioner, CAD Chambal, Kota to extent the benefit of workcharge pay scales to the labourers of Agriculture wing of CAD Organisation. The decision of the Government was communicate vide letter dated 9 -1 -82 and the office of the Area Development Commissioner in true communicated this decision to the President of Rajasthan State Drivers and Technical Employees Association Kota vide letter dated 24 -8 -82. The petitioner has stated that members of the petitioner Sangh are in employment for a number of years and they are being subjected to discriminatory treatment. The nature of the duty and the work which is being performed by the employees of the two wings of CAD are identical. They belong to the same class and therefore, there is no justification in subjecting the employees to discriminatory treatment. Even the Government had vide letter dated 12 -4 -79 decided to grant workcharge pay scales to all the employees after completion of 2 years service. No discriminatory treatment was made between the employees of the Agriculture Wing on the one hand and Irrigation Wing on the other hand. Further case of the petitioner is that the workcharge service rules have been made applicable to CAD and therefore, there is no reason for discrimination between the employees working in CAD itself on the premises that they are employed in different wings.
(3.) IN reply to the writ petition the respondents have admitted that the employees of the petitioner Sangh have been working since long in CAD Department. It, has however, been stated that Rules 1964 are not applicable to the employees of Agriculture Department. This statement has specifically been made in para 2 of the reply. Contents of para 5 of the writ petition wherein the petitioner Sangh has stated that its members come within the definition of workman, have been admitted. It has then been stated that rules, 1964 are not applicable to the workers of CAD (Agriculture Department). The workers of CAD are not paid as per BSR of P.W.D. but as per BSR of CAD Department. Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 are not applicable to the workcharge employees of CAD Department. It has then been stated that the department of CAD, Kota is a project and every project requires specific time and after completion of the project the workers are retrenched as soon as project is completed and that is why the rules of workcharge workers are not applicable to them who are engaged for the time beings on works. In para 10 of the reply it has been stated that Exhibit 3 was applicable to particular category only and the workcharge Rules, 1964 have been made applicable to the workers of Irrigation Wing and not to those of Agriculture Department. The correspondence exchanged between the Area Development Commissioner, CAD Chambal, Kota and the Finance Department has been admitted and it has been stated that as per the decision of the Government the employee of CAD are not eligible to be given the benefit of workcharge rules, 1964. In para 17 (e) it has been stated that the department of CAD is a separate department and the workers of the said department appointed on workcharged basis are not entitled to the benefit under the said rules of 1964. In para 17 (p) it has been stated that Irrigation Department and Agriculture Department are two different departments and are governed by different set of service rules.;