1. ft/.Baswaraja v. others in Civil Appeal No.213 of 2013

GPP/RPS 12010 dated 1810312010, as highly illegal, irregular, unconstitutional against the principles of naturaljustice, equity and fair play and prays to direct the respondents herein to pay the salary of the petitioners according to the 11th new PRC Rs.19,000/- plus DA, HRA and CCA, with arrears from the date of filing of the Writ Petition along with periodical increments from tinte to time with arrears and other monetary benefits as per the orders of the Division Bench of this Honourable Cor-rrt in W.P.No . 2.6788 of 2017 dt. 10/08/201 7, and orders in l.A. No.1 and 2of 2019 in W.P.No.38763/2018 in C.A. No.6a212019 on 24lO1t2O2O, and the Division Bench Judgement of this Honourable Court in batch of cases in WP No. 5556 of 2018 and batch dt.2310812018, and also as per the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in SLP No.37870 of 2012, dated 14-10-2014 lA NO: 1 OF 20?3 Petition underSection 151 CPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to pay the increased mininrum time scale as per New PRC Scales 2020 / 11th PRC in the last grade post in the scale of Rs.19,000/- + DA, HRA and CCA, per month and also Annual Grade lncrements to the petitioners by following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh and others in C.A.No.213 of 2013, dt. 2611012016, by considering the representation of the petitioners dated 2710312023, pending order Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. GURRAM SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1,2&4: AGP FOR SERVICES lll Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI RAMESH CHILLA, SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES Counsel for the Respondent No.S: AGP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER (-' HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA ORDER: Heard Sri Gurram Sri ivas, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Government Pleader for ers, learned Assistant I, appearing on behalf Assistant Government of the resPondent No.s, lea Pleader for Services-Ill appearing on behalf of respondentsL,2and4randSriRameshChilla'learned Standing Counsel for Service matters of all Municipalities Telangana, appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 2 oraver as under: ......toissueanorderordirectionmoreparticularlyonein thenatureofWritofMandamustodeclaretheactionofthe respondents in not impletnuniing the 10th and 11th PRC (RevisedPayScales2020)tothepetitionersherein,asper the Judgm"hr or the Apex court in the case of state of Punjab Vt. jug:irsingfr and others in Civil Appeal No'213 of 2Ot3, dt. 26lLOl2OL6, even after granting Minimum Time Scale of gtn-dnc (nps 2010) to ttre^petitioners vide Proc.No. ciplnpslzbro, dated Lg/o3lzolo' as highlv- illegat, irrejula., u'n.onriitutional against the principles of natural :uttiJ",'6q'ity and fair play and play: to direct the r"sponAlnts herein to pay the salary of the petitioners according to ir.,"1rth new'pRC Rs.19,000/- plus DA, HRA andCCA,*itr.u.."ursfromthedateoffilingofthe.Writ petition urong wiih periodical increments from time to time *- t{ 2 SN, J wp_228'19 2023 with arrears and other monetary benefits as per the orders of the Division Bench of this Honourable Court in W.P. No. 26788 of 2OL7 dt. 10/08/20L7, and orders in I.A. No.1 and 2 of 2Ol9 in W.P.No. 38763/2018 in C.A. No. 642/2OL9 on 24101-/2020, and the Division Bench Judgment of this Honourable Court in batch of cases in WP No: 5556 of 2018 and batch dated. 23/0812018, and also as per the judgrnent of the Honourable Supreme Court in SLp No.37870 of 2O12, dated 14-10-2014 and pass..."

3. Petitioner No.1 was initially appointed on consolidated pay/daily wages in the year 1985, petitioner No.2 was appointed in the year Lg77, petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 were appointed in the year 1981 and petitioner No.5 was appointed in the year 1986. All the petitioners are working in the rast grade posts of Attender/Watchman/Bill Collector/pump Operator. The petitioners in the year 2OL4 approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, by filing O.A. No.5566 of 2014 and the same was disposed of by this court on L7.03.2023 directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner. The petitioners submitted a representation dated 27.03.2023 to the respondents seeking to implement the Minimum Time Scale as per G.O.Ms No.122 i::.:Lj,:;'!lii 3 SN, J wp-22879]023 dated 2|.09,2016, however no action had been taken by the respondents.Now,thepetitionersareseekingthebenefitsof 11th pRC i.e., Rs.19,000 plus usual allowances, annual grade increments etc and to implement G'O:Ms No'51 dated ll.06.202lastherehasbeennorevisionofpaysince13 years. The petitioners also seek to implement the minimum time scale benefits of PRC 2015 with effect from 02,06.20|4. respondents in not PRC, the Petitioners the action of Aggrieved bY implementing approached this court by filing the present writ petition' the 10th and 11th

4. (A) "..ota1n." It is false that the petitioners are getting the 5. with the 9th PRC' as the salary in Proc.No.Gpp/npS/ZOfO, dt'18-03'2010' issued by panchayat secretJry ctu* Panchayat Pargi, Rang,areddy b;;i;i.i; is not ilre'Jompetent authority to issue the said pioi""iingt. Th" ;;-petent. authority is the District Panchayat Officer, who is9r19d both above-said pioi""di ngs ( eroie"aingt No'.11{14 2s I ss' dated 06-os - 1995, and pto.rloil/uqolzoot, dt'24-o4-2002)' Therefore, petitioieis sfriufO submit strict proof of the I"tti"g in" salary in accordance with same, as they the gth PRc. "." \r \. \!;#i2=" I 4 SN, J wp_22879_2023

6. It is further submitted that the petitioners are seeking the benefits under the 1Oth and 1lth pay Revision Cornmissions(PRC) without having been granted the 9th PRC. However, the proceedings bearing Proc.No.GPP/RPS/2010, dated 18-03-2010, purportedly issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Gram panchayat, Pargi, Rangareddy District, are without any legal sanctity, as the said Panchayat Secretary is not the competent authority to issue such proceedings relating to the implementation of pay Revision Commission It is pertinent to note that the recommendations. (B) The Aoex Court Judgment in State of puniab under:- *54. Constitution. The principle has been expounded through. a large number of judgments rendered by this Court, and constitutes law declared by this Court. The same is bindin all the courts in India, under Article L4L of the Con stitution of India. The parameters of the principle, have been summarized by us in paragraph 42 hereinabove. The princi ple of 'equal pay for equal work, has also been extended to tempo rary employees (differently described as work- charge, daily- wage, casual, ad-hoc, contractual, and the Iike). The relating to temporary employees, has been legal position summarized by US, in paragraph 44 hereinabove. The above legal position which has been repeatedly decla red, is being reiterated by us, yet again. 5 SN, J wp_22819 2023

55. In our considered artificial Parameters to , it is fallacious to determine fruits of labour. An emploYee Any one, who is comPel led to work at a lesser wage, does not do so voluntarilY. He does so, to Provi de food and shelter to his familY, at the cost of his self resPect and dignitY, at the cost of his self worth, and at the cost of his integritY. For he knows, that his dePendents would suffer immenselY, if he does not accePt the lesser wage. Any act, of PaYing less wages, as compa red to others similarlY situate, constitutes an emerging out of a act of exP enslavement, loitative position. UndoubtedlY, the action is oPPressive, domineering it comPels involuntarY and coercive, as suppressive subjugation.

56.WewouldalsoliketoextracthereinArticleT,ofthe International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rigntt, 1966. The same is reproduced below:- ..Article 7 The states Parties to the present covenant ."iojniru the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favoJrable conditions of work which ensure' in pafticular: 1i1 nemuneration which provides all workers' as a minimum' with: iii-r.i. wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value withoutdistinctionofanykind,inparticularwomenbeing gr;.int"Ld conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed 6y rn"n, with equal PaY for equal work; tiil n ieient iirinb 'for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant; (b) Safe and healthy working conditions; t;i Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his emptoyment to an appropriate higher level'.subject to no .on-riaL.utions other than those of seniority and competence; ldlRest,leisureandreasonablelimitationofworkinghours ;;i p"ri;dic holidays with pay, as well as remuneration for ir[ril r'oridiyt." iniiu is a signatory to the above covenant' -tin.ia the same on 10.'4' t979' There is no escape [;;.I from the above oorig;tion, in view of different provisions of the Constitution *i6ittA lo above' and in. view of the law Article 141 of the Constitution of declared by this i"r|.t '"aer , .;r. , I r ::&o"rti 'l '..:',}i+:.i 1 6 SN, J wp_22879_2023 India, (C) fhe :uaoment of Oivl "In our view, the petitioners are entitted to the rerief claimed by them based on the above_mentioned precedents. Even otherwise also, going by the definition of "!i^.9 scale of pay" in Auting-3tGj of Rule_9 of the Andhra Pradesh Fundamental-Rules, the petitioners are enti.tlecl to payment of increments. This Rule reads as under: "Time scale of pay,, means pay which subject to any condition prescribed in these rutes) rises by peiiodicat increments from a minimum to maximum. It ind'icates the class of pay hirther to known as progre.ssiye. The above_ extracted definition of "time scale of-pay,, reaves us in no doubt that the scare of pay has to cninge with the;hange of times by addition of periodicat increments. otherwise the expression "time scare" wourd have no meatning at all." from time to time

5. 7 SN, J w]2879 2023 2O21 observed that- ..constitution of India Guaranteed under Art.14 is a vested rightinfavourofpersonwhoclaimsequalityandparity Article 14 and 226 - Right to equality -And is enforceable againstState/Stateinstrumentalitiesinexerciseof p6*". under Art. 226 of Constitution - When equals are treated unequally, there is violation of Aft'14 - Equality is a definite'ioncept - Those who are in similar circumstances are entitted to equal treatment 6 *11. In the light of the judgments referred to supra and in view of the fact tnat the seivices of the petitioners have b.un continued since two decades, we are of the View that the petitioners are entitled to minimum time scale of pay under the principle of equal pay for equal work' even though they were engaged .by a private contractor' Ther6fore, the orders pisleo by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal t-tyderabiJ in o.A'No'3873 of 2oL4' dated 10.8.2017 and o.A.No.2369 0f 20L4 dated 6'7'20L7', are set aside. L2.Accordingly,theWritPetitionsareallowed.The respondents are iirected to grant minimum time scale of piy to the petitioners and also to add annual grade increments as and when they fell due from time to time' Ho*"r"r,thepetitionersareentitledtoallthearrears fromthedateoffilingoftheo.AsbeforetheTribunal. Nocosts.Consequentl-y,miscellaneouspetitionspending, if any, shall stand closed"' iri! . i.!'1"; ' :.1' \ ,,. .r +i;:it: .ri,:.ri':,: i.i 4:: r;i; - 8 SN, J wp-22879_2023 7 "20. A Division Bench of this court in The Greater visakhapatnam Municipar corporation, visakhapatnam, Rep. by its commissioner vs. t<. Appa Rao and otrrers, nas considered the question whether persons appointed on dairy wages in Gajuwaka Municipality are entitled to minimum time_ scale as well as periodical increments. The Division Bench followed the decision of the Supreme Court in Dharwad District pwD Literate Dairy wages Emproyees,Assn. vs. state of Karnataka2 and the direction issued in the said case by the Supreme court that casu al / daily .ui"J emproyees appointed on or before 0L.o7.19g4 shall be freated as monthly_ rated r:stablishment emproyees at the fixed puv or Rs.7g0 per month without any ailowances w.e.f. 01.01.rggb and that rhey would also be entiiled to annuar increment of Rs.15 tiil their services are regurarized. The court herd that frincipre of ,equar pay for equar work' is attracted and the stale is tbrigated to make to casual employees the same payment as regular employees; that emproyees of municiparities and municipal corporations were being given benefit of revised pay scales and they cannot be deprived of annuar grade increments when they are .discharging simirar work and functions ui iny regurar employees.

21. The Division Bench in p. Khadar Basha (2 supra) arso relied upon the definition of the term 'time-scire of pay, in ruling 31(a) of Rure 9 of the A.p. Fundamentar Rures to hord that the emproyees. of the municiparities appointuJ u, .NMR / daily wage workers' wourd be entiued to mini.r,, time-scare and also periodical increments. It held : "time-scale of pay,, means pay which subject to any condition prescribed in these rures, rises by periodicar increments from a minimum to maximum. It indicates the class of pay hitherto known as progressive.,, j3;1";,9 g::3:l# t wP No.5e34, oozttqr, e067 ander r3 or2008 (D.B.) ('-' I SN, J wp]2879-023 g.Theabove-extracteddefinitionof..timescaleof pay" leaves us in no doubt that the scale of pay has to change with the change of times by addition of periodical increments. otherwise the expression "time scale" would have no meaning at all.

10.In the light of the above discussion, we are of the opinionthatasthepetitionershavebeenextendedthe minimumtimescale,theyareentitledtoadditionof increments from time to time in the minimum time sbale withoutbeingentitledtoallotherallowanceswhicha regular emPloYee is entitled."

8. hereunder: "Heard. WefindnomeritintheSpecialLeavePetition,itis accordinglY dismissed. However,thequestionoflawiskeptopenfordetermination in an aPProPriate case".

9. PRESENT: G. PRASAD :i!,.' :!l:ri " 1 l0 ci) SN, J wp_22879_2023 Proc. No.GPP/RPS./20 10, Dated 18.03.2010 Sub:- Establishment Gram panchayat, parigi Ranga Reddy District - Full time contingent Employees - Revision of rate of remuneration to Rs.6700/- being the minimum of the last grade service with allowances - sanctioned orders issued. Ref: -

1. GOMs.No.52 Finance (pCI) Dept: Date : 25.O2.2OLO 2. Applications date 15.03.2010 of Sri M. Baswaraj, Attender. 3. Applications date 15.03.2010 of Smt. Bandemma, Sweeper, 4. Applications date 15.03.2010 of Sri r. Anajaneyuru, Watchmen (PWSS) 5. .Applications date 15.03.2010 of sri A. Rajaratnam, Watchmen (PWSS), 6. Applications date 15.03.2010 of Sri Gouse Mahinuddin Operator (PWSS). *** In the proceeding No.Ar/2429195, Date 06.09.199s of the District Panchayat officer, Ranga Reddy Dist. has sanctioned fixed pay of Rs.74o/- with usual allowances to the following full time contingent employees of Gram panchayat, parigi Ranga Reddy District with effect from 01.07.1995.

1. Sri M. Baswaraj, Attender 2. Smt. Bandemma, Sweeper 3. T. anjajenylu, Watchman (pWSS) 4. A. Rajaratnam, watchman (pWSS) 5. Sri Gouse Mohinuddin Mohd., Operator (PWSS). their long service etc., Now the Government in the G.o. 1't read above have ordered for the revision of remuneration to Rs.6700/- p.M. being the minimum of the time scale of Rs.67gOt_ assigned to last i.uJ" services in revision of pay scate 2010 to the iult-time contiiglni employees and also ailowed D.A., H.R.A., etc., on remuneration of \ '4P ,o 1l SN, J wp_22879:2023 Rs.6700/- and shall be given effect from 01.04.2oL0 and the arrears shall be paid in cash. Therefore in Pursuance of the G.O 1't read above the PanchaYat SecretarY.

10. (a) Petitioners seek a direction to respondents to implementG.o.MsNo.25dated18.03.2015and.G.o.MsNo. 5l,datedll.06.2o2Lpertainingtotheissuanceoftherevised pay scales as per the PRC to the petitioners herein' (b)Undersimilarcircumstances,thisCourtpassed finalordersonLB.o7.2023inW.P.No.16881of2023,W.P. No.26788of2ot7andalsoinW.P.No.5556of2018andbatch andtherefore,thepetitionersareentitledforthereliefas prayed for in the present writ petition' (c ) The ludgment of this Court dated 24'0t'2025 in W.P.No.3T03gof20tTissquarelyapplicabletothepresent casewhereunderthisCourtdirectedtherespondent \ I' ,l I t2 (Ti SN, J \vp_22879_2023 authorities to fix the pay of the petitioners in revised p'ay scales of 2015 and pay all consequential monetary benefits inctuding arrears at the rate of 9o/o p.d. and the PRC of 2015 has to be released. (d) Proceedings GPP/RPS/2010, dated 18.03.2010 of the Panchayat Secretary, Pargi, granting minimum time scale of 9th PRC to the petitioners is borne on record, yet, the respondents are not implementing the 1Oth and 11th pRC and the respondents are not paying the salary to the petitioners as per G.O.Ms No.25 dated 18.03.2015 and G.O.Ms No.51 dated

11.06.2021. as oraved for in the present writ petition

11. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3 placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 3'd respondent in particular para Nos.5 and 6 (referred to and extracted above) contends that in view of the fact that the petitioners without having been extended legitimate benefits under the gth pRC l3 SN, J wp 22879 2023 cannot seek the benefits under the 11th and 12th Pay Revision Commissions. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for the relief prayed for in the present writ petition' L2. It is represented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioner Nos.2, 3, and 4 have retired from service about two years back and therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the release of the arrears in respect of the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 as per their eligibility. 1Qth PRC is applicable with effect from 01'07'2013 and 11th pRC is applicable with effect from 01.07.2018.

13. A bare perusal of the proceedings of the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Pargi, Ranga Reddy District (referred to and extracted above) clearly indicates that the Government vide G.o.Ms No.52 dated 25.02.2fJ10 had ordered for the remuneration of Rs.5,7OOl- per month being the minimum of the time scale of Rs.6r7OO/- assigned to last grade services in revision of pay scale 2O1O to the full time contingent employees and also allowed Dearness Allowance, HRA etc., on remuneration of Rs.5r7OOt- with effeCt from 01.04'2010 \ \ a t: t4 6,r SN, J wp 22879 2023 and the arrears also had been paid in cash and sinte then, the petitioners had been receiving Rs.6,lAO/- per month as monthly remuneration as on date and hence, hence the petitioners are entitled for consideration of petitioners request for payment of salary of the petitioners according to the llth new pRC Rs.Lg.OOAl- plus D.A, H.R.A. and C.C.A with arrears from the date of filing of the writ petition along with periodical increments from time to time with arrears and other monetary benefits as per the view and the law laid down in the Judgment referred to and extracted above.

14. Takino into consideration : (a) The observations in the Judgments (referred to and extracted above), (b) Taking note of the fact as borne on record that the petitioners received gth pRc with effect from 18.O3.2O1O (refered to and extracted above), \ \ 15 SN' J wp 22879-023 (c) Duly taking into consideration the averments madeinthecountpraffidavitfiledonbehalfofthe3fd respondent in par*cutar para Nos'5 and 6 (referred to and extracted above), The writ petition is allowed' This Court opines that the stand taken by the 3'd respondent in the counter affidavit is factually incorrect and contrary to the record and hence the pleas put forth by the respondents are untenable and rejected. The respondents are directed to consider the request of the petitioners for the prayer ai sought for in the present writ Petition for payment of sarary of the petitioners according to the llth new pRC Rs.19rOO0/- plus, D.A, H.R.A., and c.c.A with arrears from the date of firing of the writ petition arong with periodicar increments, from time to time with arrears and other monetary benefits as per the view and the taw raid down in the Judgments referred to and extracted above, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and dury communicate the decision to the petitioners. | i j^ -: , :-:a>' :.1..' -' ,T L I i, t6 SN, J wp 22879_2023 Miscellaneous petitions, if doy, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. \ro,-o. sRrNrvASA REDDY REGISTRAR s / //TRUE COPY/ N OFFICER \, To, q.irlrlJ;!l9l'6'ni's""'"taribt' t*::ff1' Administration, t\^asab rank' I l.ThePrincipalSecretary.MullgloarAdministrationandUrbanDevelopment 2. it'l6 Cornmrssionei and Directo 3 Til3ffif,xis'sioner, ;. ih; oi't,i.t q"li.5T;,.($,T]K'#"oi"-i"rlngrrr, "tirn"" and Planning pqsi Yy1:lpfliY;Xll3l3:i,i,?:l'$:, r ,$#e"t{:+1tg*H$,fl E*1hBlff{qfrt,B,o,h'"'L,,,eorreanganaa'i ,i*!"trtitTbu','l.gitL.1,'fi ff&Ii-'ili",[jb';15'"tT#L,naa, o Two CCs to L UvJeraOaO [OUT]

10.Two CD CoPies Btu BS w f HIGH COURT DATED:2810812025 , d CC TODAY o(J a. ( * .t t I;,.i 1 'r. n Ltii 1t.':?in r) tit; .t?; I,- I ORDER WP.No.22879 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS %