Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arjan Kumar Sikri
NON REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1684-1686 OF 2019
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 5028-5030 OF 2019)
ARISING OUT OF DIARY NO. 43592 OF 2018)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT .....APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
PWD AND FOREST EMPLOYEES UNION
& ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1687-1689 of 2019
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOs. 5031-5033 OF 2019)
ARISING OUT OF DIARY NO. 36182 OF 2018)
J U D G M E N T
A.K.SIKRI, J.
Leave granted.
2. In these appeals filed by the State of Gujarat, challenge is laid to
the common judgment dated June 14, 2018 passed by the High
Court of Gujarat in contempt proceedings which were initiated by
the respondents herein. To mention here, in nutshell, the
appellant Government had passed Resolution dated October 17,
1988 whereby certain benefits were given to its daily wage
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 1 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
workers, who have been working for number of years. The
respondent Union, which represent those workers, had
approached the High Court for direction to extend those benefits
contained in Government Resolution (GR) dated October 17,
1988. Since this GR dated October 17, 1988 was not extended
to the Forest Department of the appellant, to which Department
the respondents belong, the respondents had filed writ petition in
the High Court seeking extension of GR dated October 17, 1988
in respect of Forest Department as well. This writ petition was
allowed by the single Judge of the High Court vide order dated
March 21, 1997. Letter Patents Appeal (LPA) was preferred
against the said judgment which was dismissed by the Division
Bench of the High Court on April 29, 2003. Special Leave
Petition (SLP) thereagainst was also dismissed by this Court on
November 29, 2004.
3. Thereafter, appellant passed another GR dated March 24, 2006
in respect of Road and Building Department for determining
pensionable service in cases of daily wagers having attained
permanency on account of application of GR dated October 17,
1988. However, this representation was dismissed by the
appellant on May 3, 2008. Respondents again approached the
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 2 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
High Court against the dismissal of the said representation which
was decided by the High Court on October 29, 2010. By means
of said order, High Court directed the Forest and Environment
Department of the appellant to consider the case of the daily
wagers of the respondent union for regularisation/conferring
permanent status, afresh and also to consider framing of a
scheme for giving quasi permanent status to such workers at par
with the scheme for daily wagers in other Departments. This was
followed by another order dated August 25, 2011 passed in
Miscellaneous Civil Application whereby High Court directed the
appellant to frame a scheme for giving quasi permanent status to
daily wagers in compliance with its earlier judgment dated
October 29, 2010. LPA against this judgment was dismissed by
the High Court on February 28, 2012. The appellant challenged
the order in LPA by preferring SLP in this Court. Leave was
granted and ultimately appeal was heard and decided on July 9,
2013 which is reported as State of Gujarat & Ors. v. PWD
Employees Union & Ors.1
. In this judgment, this Court inter alia
gave the following directions:
"28. Thus, the principal question that falls to be
considered in these appeals is: whether in the facts and
circumstances it will be desirable for the Court to direct the
appellants to straightaway regularise the services of all the
daily-wage workers working for more than five years or the
1 (2013) 12 SCC 417
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 3 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
daily-wage workers working for more than five years are
entitled for some other relief?
29. As per the scheme contained in the Resolution dated
17-10-1988 all the daily-wage workers were not entitled for
regularisation or permanency in the services. As per the
said Resolution the daily wagers are entitled to the
following benefits:
“(i) They are entitled to daily wages as per the
prevailing daily wages. If there is presence of more
than 240 days in first year, daily wagers are eligible
for paid Sunday, medical allowance and national
festival holidays.
(ii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have
service of more than five years and less than 10
years are entitled for fixed monthly salary along with
dearness allowance as per prevailing standard, for
his working days. Such daily wagers will get two
optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous
leaves, Sunday leave and national festival holidays.
Such daily wagers will also be eligible for getting
medical allowance and deduction of provident fund.
(iii) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have
service of more than ten years but less than 15 years
are entitled to get minimum pay scale on a par with
skilled workers along with dearness allowance as per
prevailing standard, for his working days. Moreover,
such daily wagers will get two optional leaves in
addition to 14 miscellaneous leaves, Sunday leave
and national festival holidays. He/She will be eligible
for getting medical allowance and deduction of
provident fund.
(iv) Daily wagers and semi-skilled workers who have
service of more than 15 years will be considered as
permanent worker and such semi-skilled workers will
get current pay scale of skilled worker along with
dearness allowance, local city allowance and house
rent allowance. They will get the benefit as per the
prevailing rules of gratuity, retired (sic retiral) salary,
general provident fund. Moreover, they will get two
optional leaves in addition to 14 miscellaneous
leaves, 30 days' earned leave, 20 days' half-pay
leave, Sunday leave and national festival holidays.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 4 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
The daily-wage workers and semi-skilled workers
who have completed more than 15 years of their
service will get one increment, two increments for 20
years service and three increments for 25 years in
the current pay scale of skilled workers and their
salary will be fixed accordingly.”
30. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
the finding of the Gujarat High Court dated 29-10-2010 in
PWD Employees Union v. State of Gujarat [PWD
Employees Union v. State of Gujarat, Special Civil
Application No. 8647 of 2008, order dated 29-10-2010
(Guj)] and connected matters and the fact that the said
judgment is binding between the parties, we are of the
view that the appellants should be directed to grant the
benefit of the scheme as contained in the Resolution dated
17-10-1988 to all the daily-wage workers of the Forest and
Environment Department working for more than five years,
providing them the benefits as per our finding at para 29
above. The appellants are directed accordingly. The
judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge
dated 29-10-2010 [PWD Employees Union v. State of
Gujarat, Special Civil Application No. 8647 of 2008, order
dated 29-10-2010 (Guj)] as affirmed by the Division Bench
by its order dated 28-2-2012 [State of Gujarat v. PWD
Employees Union, LPA No. 1754 of 2011 in Misc. Civil
Application No. 17 of 2011, decided on 28-2-2012 (Guj)]
stands modified to the extent above. The benefit should be
granted to the eligible daily-wage workers of the Forest
and Environment Department working for more than five
years including those who are performing work other than
building maintenance and repairing but they will be entitled
for the consequential benefits w.e.f. 29-10-2010 or
subsequent date from which they are so eligible within four
months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of
this order. The appeals stand disposed of with the
aforesaid observation and directions to the appellant State
and its authorities. There shall be no separate orders as to
costs.
Review filed by the appellant against this judgment was also
dismissed on January 29, 2014.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 5 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
4. In the meantime, respondent Union preferred contempt petition in
the High Court. The appellant, on the other hand, filed
application for extension of time for compliance of the judgment
dated July 9, 2013. This Court granted six weeks time for
compliance.
5. Thereafter, the appellant issued GR dated September 15, 2014
as a policy decision to extend the benefit of the aforesaid
judgments. The respondents herein filed another contempt
petition submitting that this GR dated September 15, 2014 was
not in conformity with earlier GR dated October 17, 1988 and,
therefore, it amounted to contempt of the Court’s order as the
appellant had failed to carry out the directions of the Court by not
giving the benefits in terms of GR dated October 17, 1988. The
High Court has accepted the contention of the respondents
herein. In its detailed judgment dated June 14, 2018, though it
has held that case for contempt was not made out, at the same
time, the petition is disposed of with the following directions:
"34. The respondents are directed to extend the benefits
of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 as ordered
by the Supreme Court in order dated 09.07.2013 passed in
case of PWD Employees’ Union (supra) and as reiterated
by the learned Single Judge in its order on 11.6.2015 in
the proceeding of SCA 9814 of 2014 and examine the
case of all the concerned in light thereof and without being
influenced by their own Government Resolution dated
15.9.2014, as we have categorically held that Government
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 6 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
Resolution to be not in consonance with the Supreme
Court order dated 09.07.2013 passed in case of PWD
Employees’ Union (supra). The entire exercise shall be
over within period of 60 days from the date of receipt of
writ of the order. We dispose of this petition with aforesaid
directions. Notice discharged in each matter. However,
there shall be no order as to costs.”
6. It may be noted that while giving the aforesaid directions, the
order contains a detailed discussion to the effect that GR dated
September 15, 2014 is deviation from earlier GR dated October
17, 1988 as per which the appellant was supposed to give the
benefits to the respondents.
7. In challenging the aforesaid order of the High Court by way of
present appeals, the contention of the appellant is that GR dated
September 15, 2014 was in fact issued to implement the
judgment of the court in letter and spirit. The case set up by the
appellant is that the Forest Department in the State Government,
while extending the above benefits to all the daily wage workers
of the Forest Department, and in order to maintain uniformity with
regard to applicability of GR dated October 17, 1988 to daily
wage workers working in different divisions/Districts of the Forest
Department of the State, issued a GR dated September 15, 2014.
The said Resolution is based on GR dated October 17, 1988 and
subsequent Resolutions. The reliefs granted by this Court have
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 7 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
been extended to nearly 58000 workers. The judgment of this
Court as directed above has been substantially complied with. As
per the appellant, the Forest Department of the State has
followed the interpretation of core GR dated October 17, 1988 as
revised and clarified from time to time and has come up with the
GR dated September 15, 2014 with the assistance of the Road
and Building Department of the State.
8. When these matters came up for preliminary hearing,
respondents appeared through caveat. Since the appellant is
maintaining that many benefits are given to the respondents in
terms of the judgment, the appellant was advised to demonstrate
as to how the judgment was implemented. On January 09, 2019,
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the
appellant, submitted a chart to this effect. Learned senior
counsel appearing for the respondents requested for time to
respond to the same and accordingly time was granted.
Respondents filed their reply. The matter came up for hearing
again on January 23, 2019 when the appellant sought time to
take instructions qua certain averments contained in the reply.
Accordingly, the matter was posted for hearing on February 06,
2019.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 8 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
9. During the arguments on February 06, 2019, the appellant
handed over their submissions in response to reply filed by the
respondent Union which has narrowed down the controversy
considerably. Those matters where difference between the
parties persists, arguments were heard.
10. In order to understand the manner in which judgment had been
implemented by the appellant, we may reproduce the chart that
was handed over to the Court on January 09, 2019. It is as
under:
Number of
years
worked
Benefits
granted vide
GR dated
17.10.1988
Prevailing
Standards of
Daily Wages
on 17.10.1988
Prevailing
Daily Wages
on 29.10.2010
Present Pay
Scale (Grade
Pay + Pay
Band + D.A.
+ H.R.A. +
Misc.
Expense)
1 Presence of
more than
240 days in
first year
Entitled to daily
wages as per
the prevailing
daily wages
Rs.452/- per
month
Rs. 4456/- per
month
2 Service of
more than
five years and
less than ten
years
Entitled to fixed
monthly salary
along with DA
as per
prevailing
standard
Rs.750/- +
(D.A. 23%)
Fixed Pay of
Rs. 4440/- +
Grade Pay of
Rs. 1300 +
D.A. (45%)
Ranging from
Rs.15,144 –
Rs. 18,307
3 Service of
more than ten
years but less
than fifteen
years
Minimum pay
scale at par
with skilled
workers along
with DA
Pay Scale of
Rs. 750-940 +
D.A. (23%)
Pay Scale of
Rs. 4440-7440
+ Grade Pay
of Rs. 1300/- +
D.A. (45%) +
3% increment
each year.
Ranging from
Rs. 12,162 –
Rs. 18,848
(according to
the number of
years
worked)
4 Service of
more than
fifteen years
Current pay
scale of skilled
worker with DA
and HRA
Pay Scale of
Rs. 750-940 +
D.A. (23%) +
additional 1
Pay Scale of
Rs. 4440-7440
+ Grade Pay
of Rs. 1300/- +
Rs. 16,241 –
18,848
(according to
the number of
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 9 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
increment (3%
+ 3%)
D.A. (45%) +
3% increment
each year +
additional 1
increment.
years
worked)
5 Service of
more than 20
years
Pay Scale of
Rs. 750-940 +
D.A. (23%) +
annual
increment
Fixed Pay of
Rs. 4440-7440
+ Grade Pay
of Rs. 1300/- +
D.A. (45%) +
3% increment
each year + 2
additional
increment.
Ranging from
Rs. 18637 –
19414/-
(according to
the number of
years
worked)
6 Service of
more than 25
years
Pay Scale of
Rs. 750-940 +
D.A. (23%) +
additional 3
increments
(3% + 3% +
3% + 3%)
Fixed Pay of
Rs. 4440-7440
+ Grade Pay
of Rs. 1300/- +
D.A. (45%) +
3% increment
each year +
additional 3
increment.
Rs. 20,005
11. The respondents have given their version in tabulated/chart form
which according to them is in terms of GR dated October 17,
1988 as directed by this Court in its decision dated July 09, 2013.
The chart prepared by the respondents is as follows:
Number of years
worked
Benefits under
GR dated
17.10.1988
Prevailing
Standard of
Wages under
GR dated
17.10.1988
Entitlement on
29.10.2010
1 Presence of more
than 240 days in
year
Entitled to daily
wages as per the
prevailing daily
wages + Paid
Sundays +
Medical
Allowance (MA) +
National Festival
Holidays
Rs.452/- per
month
Rs. 4456/- per
month
2 Service of more
than five years and
Entitled to fixed
monthly salary
Rs.750/- + (D.A.
23%)
Fixed Pay of Rs.
4440/- + Grade
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 10 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
less than ten years along with DA as
per prevailing
standard
MA + deduction of
General Provident
Fund (GPF)
2 voluntary/
optional/
restricted + 12
casual leaves +
holidays on
Sundays +
National Holidays
allowed with pay.
MA + deduction
of GPF + 2
voluntary/
optional + 14
casual leaves +
holidays on
Sundays +
National
Holidays
allowed with
pay.
Pay of Rs. 1300 +
D.A. (45%)
MA + deduction
of GPF
2 voluntary/
optional + 14
casual leaves +
holidays on
Sundays +
National
Holidays allowed
with pay.
3 Service of more
than ten years but
less than fifteen
years
Minimum pay scale
at par with skilled
workers along with
DA
MA + deduction of
CPF
2 voluntary/
optional + 14
casual leaves +
holidays on
Sundays +
National Holidays
allowed with pay.
Pay Scale of Rs.
950-1500 + D.A.
(23%) + yearly
increments.
MA + deduction
of CPF
2 voluntary/
optional + 14
casual leaves +
holiday on
Sundays +
National
Holidays
allowed with
pay
Pay Band of Rs.
5200-20,200 with
Grade Pay of Rs.
1900 + D.A.
(45%) + 3%
increment every
year
MA + deduction
of GPF
2 voluntary/
optional + 14
casual leaves +
holiday on
Sundays +
National
Holidays allowed
with pay
4 Service of more
than fifteen years
Current pay scale
of skilled worker
with DA and HRA +
local
compensatory
allowance
Gratuity +
Pension + General
Provident Fund
2 voluntary/
optional leaves +
14 days Casual
Leave + 30 days
earned leave + 20
days half-pay
Pay Scale of Rs.
950-1500 + D.A.
(23%) +
additional 1
increment (3%) +
(3%) yearly
increment +
local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance.
Gratuity +
Pension +
General
Provident Fund
2 voluntary/
optional leaves
Pay Band of Rs.
5200-20,200 with
Grade Pay of Rs.
1900 + D.A.
(45%) + additional
1 increment + 3%
increment every
year + local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance
Gratuity +
Pension +
General
Provident Fund
2 voluntary/
optional leaves +
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 11 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
leave during the
year + holidays on
Sunday every
week + National
Holidays.
+ 14 days
Casual Leave +
30 days earned
leave + 20 days
half-pay leave
during the year
+ holidays on
Sunday every
week + National
Holidays.
14 days Casual
Leave + 30 days
earned leave +
20 days half-pay
leave during the
year + holidays
on Sunday every
week + National
Holidays.
5 Service of more
than twenty years
Two increment for
20 years service
in the concerned
pay scale of
skilled worker
Pay Scale of Rs.
950-1500 + D.A.
(23%) +
additional 2
increment (3%) +
(3%) yearly
increment +
local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance.
Other benefits
as mentioned in
row 4 of column
4.
Pay Band of Rs.
5200-20,200 with
Grade Pay of Rs.
1900 + D.A.
(45%) + additional
2 increment + 3%
increment every
year + local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance
Other benefits as
mentioned in
row 4 of column
4.
6 Service of more
than 25 years
Three increment
for 25 years
service in the
concerned pay
scale of skilled
worker
Pay Scale of Rs.
950-1500 + D.A.
(23%) +
additional 3
increment (3%) +
(3%) yearly
increment +
local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance.
Other benefits
as mentioned in
row 4 of column
4.
Pay Band of Rs.
5200-20,200 with
Grade Pay of Rs.
1900 + D.A.
(45%) + additional
3 increment + 3%
increment every
year + local
compensatory
allowance and
house rent
allowance
Other benefits as
mentioned in
row 4 of column
4.
12. The appellant has, in the written submissions, generally accepted
the position given above. However, the appellant has given this
acceptance subject to following exceptions:
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 12 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
(i) In the category mentioned at Serial Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6,
every worker is not entitled to the pay scale mentioned by them
as per GR dated October 17, 1988 or in the corresponding scale
on October 29, 2010 because once they become permanent, they
will have to be fitted in the job description in terms of the Gujarat
Civil Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred
to as the ‘Rules’) as revised from time to time and not by
Minimum Wages Act. Any anomaly within the same job
description between people who have been regularly appointed
and these workers of the respondent union would mean that
everybody else will ask for it not only in this department, but other
department of Government will have great difficulty in adhering to
it. The pay scale mentioned in Serial Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 cannot
be applied across the board.
(ii) The old Pension Scheme has been scrapped by the
Government and Contributory Pension Fund (CPF) Scheme/New
Pension Scheme (NPS) has been introduced with effect from
April 01, 2005. Therefore, CPF Scheme/NPS has been made
applicable under the GR dated September 15, 2014, and the
benefits of the same are being granted to the workers of the
respondent union.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 13 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
(iii) Similarly, the old General Provident Fund (GPF) Scheme
has been scrapped by the Government and CPF Scheme has
been introduced with effect from April 01, 2005. Therefore, CPF
Scheme has been made applicable, and the benefits of the same
are being granted to the workers of the respondent union.
(iv) The worker is given benefit of past services considering the
earlier period on which he worked for more than 240 days in a
year.
(v) The GR dated October 17, 1988 provides for 14 days of
casual leave including 2 days of voluntary leave/optional leave.
However, due to inadvertent translation errors, the judgment
passed by this Court directed 14 days of casual leave in addition
to 2 days of voluntary leave/optional leave. Therefore, the GR
dated September 15, 2014 has incorporated the two days of
voluntary leave/restricted leave and 12 days of casual leave
which is applicable to all Government employees.
13. Having regard to the above, we are confining our discussion to
the aforesaid exceptions taken by the appellant. In the first
instance, it is pointed out by the appellant that even if the
respondents become permanent, they would be entitled to be
fitted in the job description in terms of the Rules. What is
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 14 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
emphasised is that even after regularisation, their pay scales
cannot be more than the pay which is given to the employees
who are taken on permanent basis. This appears to be a very
sound argument. The only plea was that whatever is given to
such employees in other departments, same benefit be extended
to the respondents as well. It is difficult to countenance this
submission which we find to be legally impermissible. That is
hardly any justifiable response to rebut the same. It is to be kept
in mind that members of respondent union were all engaged on
daily wage basis. No doubt, the appellant Government decided
to confer certain benefits upon these daily wage workers
depending upon the number of years of service they put in.
Judgment dated July 09, 2013 proceeds on that basis. Under
certain circumstances, namely, on completion of specified
number of years of service on daily wage basis, these daily wage
workers are entitled to become permanent. On attaining the
status of permanency/regular employees, they become at par
with those employees who were appointed on permanent basis
from beginning, after undergoing the proper selection procedure
on proving their merit. These daily wagers cannot be given the
pay scales which are even better than the pay scales given to
regularly appointed employees. The Rules are statutory in nature
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 15 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
which have been framed in exercise of powers conferred by the
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. On becoming
permanent, such daily wagers can, at the most, claim that they be
fitted in the job descriptions in terms of the said pay rules and
their pay be fixed accordingly. The appellant is ready to do that.
We, therefore, accept the plea mentioned in exception (i) above.
14. Insofar as plea at paras (ii) and (iii) is concerned, the appellant
intends to deny the benefit of GPF on the ground that w.e.f. April
01, 2005, CPF Scheme/NPS has been introduced. However, on
that basis, all such employees cannot be denied the benefit of
GPF. The earlier pension scheme continues to annued to the
benefit of those who enter the service before April 01, 2005.
Therefore, all those daily wagers who become entitled to get the
status of regular/permanent employees before April 01, 2005 has
to be given the benefit of GPF. To put it otherwise, April 01, 2005
would be treated as cut-off date. All those persons who would be
entitled to regularisation/permanent status prior to April 01, 2005
shall be given the benefit of earlier scheme i.e. GPF. However,
those who attain this status after April 01, 2005 shall be governed
by CPF Scheme/NPS.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 16 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
15. Insofar as exception (iv) mentioned by the appellant is concerned,
there appears to be some merit therein. For counting the number
of years for giving benefit to the workers in terms of judgment
dated July 09, 2013, only those years would be taken into
consideration wherein these workers had worked for 240 days or
more in a year i.e. in consonance with the GR dated October 17,
1988. Furthermore, there is no direction in the judgment of this
Court to the effect that the period of service of 240 days in a year
should be only in the initial year and not thereafter. In fact, when
the learned senior counsel for the respondents were confronted
with the aforesaid position, they conceded to this position.
16. Insofar as exception (v) noted above is concerned, it is not in
dispute that regular employees are entitled to 12 days of casual
leave in a year i.e. applicable to all Government employees and
the respondents could not dispute this. The respondents
workers who have been working on daily wage basis cannot be
given casual leave which is more than the entitlement extended
to regular Government employees. We accept the plea of the
appellant that GR dated October 17, 1988 which provides for 14
days casual leave including 2 days of voluntary/optional leave is
the result of inadvertent transaction error. Even otherwise, as
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 17 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
pointed out above, the casual leave for daily wagers cannot be
more than the regular Government employees. We, therefore,
hold that the respondents employees shall be entitled to 12 days
of casual leave and 2 days of voluntary leave/restricted leave.
17. With the aforesaid clarifications, the benefits payable to the
members of the respondents union shall now be worked out and
the same be paid to them. Exercise in this behalf shall be
completed within a period of two months from the date of this
judgment. The impugned judgment of the High Court is modified
and the appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent.
.............................................J.
(A.K. SIKRI)
.............................................J.
(S. ABDUL NAZEER)
.............................................J.
(M.R. SHAH)
NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 15, 2019.
Civil Appeal No. of 2019 & Anr. Page 18 of 18
(arising out of SLP (C) No. 43592 of 2018) & Anr.
