Holding

Contingent paid staff who have been performing Class IV duties must be paid wages equivalent to the minimum pay of the regular pay‑scale and be absorbed as far as possible.

Summary

The petition was filed by the U.P. Income‑Tax Department Contingent Paid Staff Welfare Association on behalf of its members, who had been working for many years as Class IV employees in the Income‑Tax Department but were paid daily‑rated wages lower than those of regular Class IV staff. The petition sought a writ of mandamus under Article 32 directing the Union of India and the Income‑Tax Department to regularise the services of the contingent staff and to pay them wages and allowances on par with regular employees. The Court observed that the factual situation was identical to that in the earlier writ petitions (Nos. 373 and 302 of 1986) concerning daily‑rated casual labour in the Posts and Telegraph Department, which had been decided in Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India. Relying on that precedent, the Court directed that the contingent paid staff be paid the minimum pay of the corresponding regular pay‑scale, along with dearness and additional dearness allowances, and that a rational scheme be prepared for their absorption where they have served continuously for more than one year. The order also confirmed that all other benefits currently enjoyed by the workmen should continue. Consequently, the petition was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether contingent paid staff performing Class IV work in the Income‑Tax Department are entitled to wages and allowances equivalent to regular Class IV employees.
Whether the respondents are obligated under Article 32 to issue a writ of mandamus for regularisation and absorption of such staff.
Whether the directions issued in Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India are applicable to the present case.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 32

Subjects

wage equalitycontingent paid staffregularisation of serviceArticle 32writ of mandamuspublic service employmentdearness allowance

Judgment

A U.P. INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT CONTINGENT PAID
STAFF WELFARE ASSOCIATION
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DECEMBER 4, 1987
B
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.]

Contingent Paid Staff-Regularisation of their Services.

The petitioner, the Association of the U.P. Income-tax Depart-
C ment Contingent Paid Staff is aggrieved that even though its members I
have been rendering service as class IV employees in the ll.P. Income- J
tax Department for a large number of years, the Department is not
regularising their services and absorbing them in the class IV services,
and they are being paid wages as daily rated labourers, lower than the
D 8alary and allowances paid to the class IV employees of the Depart-
ment. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition in this Court, praying for a
writ of mandamus for the relief above-mentioned.

Allowing the petition, the Court,

E HELD: The questions involved in this case are almost the same as
in the Writ l.'ditfo11• Nos. 373 and 302 of 1986, decided by this Court
by its jmlgment dated October 27, 1987, reported in Daily Rated
Casual Labour Employed under P & T Department, through Bhara-
i -
r
•
tiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India and Ors., (JT. 1987 [4]
S.C. 164), and the same orders/directions as given in that case, he /"',
passed in this case. Accordingly, respondents directed to pay wage: to
F
the workmen employed as contingent paid staff of the Income-tax
Department throughout India, doing the work of class IV employees
at the rates equivalent to the minimum pay in the pay scale of the
regularly employed workers in the corresponding cadres, without any
increments with effect from December I, 1986. Such workmen are also
G entitled to corresponding dearness allowance and additional dearness
allowance payable thereon. Whatever other benefits are now being
enjoyed by the said workmen shall continue to be extended to them.
The respondents shall prepare a scheme on a rational basis for absorb-
ing as far as possible the contingent paid staff of the Income-tax Depart-
ment, who have been continuously working for more than one year as
H Class IV employees in the Income-tax Department. [17111; 172H; l73A-C;

170
U.P. INCOME-TAXDEPARTMENTv. U.0.1. [VENKATARAMIAH,J.[ 171

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Pe.tition (Civil) No. 1670 A
of I986.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).
•'

R.C. Kaushik for the Petitioner.
B
V.C. Mahajan, Ms. A. Subhashini and Girish Chandra for the
Respondents.

The following Order of the Court was delivered

ORDER
c
This is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India .

.,, The petitioner in this case is the U.P. Income-tax Department
-< Contingent Paid Staff Welfare Association. The members of the said
association, as the name of the Association itself suggests, are the D
contingent paid staff in the Income-tax Department. Their complaint
is that even though they have been rendering the service as Class IV
employees in the Income-tax Department for a large number of
years, the Income-tax Department has not taken steps to regularise
-... their services and to absorb them as members of the Class IV services
and that they are being paid wages as daily rated labourers lower E
than the salary and allowances which the Class IV employees of the
·- Department have been drawing. They pray for the issue of a writ in
the nature of mandamus to the respondents to pay them the same
salary and allowances which are paid to the employees of the
Department in corresponding posts and also for regularising their
service. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respon- F
dents. The respondents do not deny that the contingent paid staff are
being paid daily wages lower than what is being paid to regular emp-
loyees. It also refers to certain Government order providing for reg-
ularisation under certain terms and conditions.

When this petition came up for admission the Court directed G
that this case should be listed after the disposal of the Writ Petitions
No. 373 and 302 of 1986 instituted by the daily rated casual labour
employed in the Posts and Telegraph Department, since the ques-
tions involved in this case and in those two writ petitions were almost
the same. By its judgment dated 27.10.1987 in Daily Rated
Casual Labour employed under P & T Department H
172 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1988] 2 S.C.R.

A though Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India
& Ors., (JT. !987 4 S.C. 164, this Court has issued the following
directions as regards the claim of the daily rated workmen involved
therein for higher wages:-

"We accordingly direct the Union of India and the
B other respondents to pay wages to the workmen who are
employed as casual labourers belonging to the several
categories of employees referred to above in the Posts &
Telegraph Department at the rates equivalent to the
minimum pay in the pay scales of the regularly employed
workers in the corresponding cadres but without any
increments with effect from 5th February, 1986 on which
c date the first of the above two petitions, namely, Writ
Petition No. 302 of 1986 was filed. The petitioners are
entitled .to corresponding Dearness Allowance and Addi-
tional Dearness Allowance, if any, payable thereon. What-
ever other benefits which are now being enjoyed by the ..
D casual labourers shall continue to be extended to them."

On the claim for regularisation of the services of the workmen
involved in the above-mentioned case, this Court issued the following
direction:-

E "We, therefore, direct all the respondents to pre-
pare a scheme on a rational basis for absorbing as far as
possible the casual labourers who have been continuously
working for more than one year in the Posts and Tele-
graph Department."

F The facts and circumstances of the present case are similar to
the facts and circumstances of the case relating to the daily rated
labour in the Posts and Telegraph Department. We have carefully
considered the pleas in the counter-affidavit. The Government orders
providing for the absorption of the contingent paid staff are hedged
in by a number of conditions. We also find that many such employees
G have been working on daily wages for nearly eight years and more.
We are not satisfied with the scheme which is now in force. We are,
therefore, of the view that in this case also we should issue the same
directions as in the above decision for the reasons given by the Court
in the above decision. We accordingly allow this Writ Petition and
direct the respondents to pay wages to the workmen who are emp-
H Joyed as the contingent paid staff of the Income-tax Department
U.P. INCOME-TAXDEPARTMENTv. U.0.1. [VENKATARAMIAH,J.J 173

throughout India, doing the work of Class IV employees at the A
rates equivalent to the minimum pay in the pay-scale of the regularly
~. ' employed workers in the corresponding cadres, without any incre-
ments with effect from lst December, 1986. Such workmen are also
entitled to corresponding Dearness Allowance and Additional Dear-
ness Allowance payable thereon. Whatever other benefits which are
now being enjoyed by the said workman shall continue to be exten- 8
ded to them. We further direct the respondents to prepare a scheme
on a rational basis for absorbing as far as possible the contingent paid
staff of the Income-tax Department who have been continuously
working for more than one year as Class IV employees in the
- ( . Income-tax Deparment.
c
1 This petition is accordingly disposed of with no order as to
.J.. costs.

S.L. Petition allowed.