The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.39665 of 2023 Sri Suresh Kumar Behera …. Petitioner Mr. S.N. Panda, Advocate -versus- The Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, Balasore and another …. Opp. Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S.K. Swain, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 11.12.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Mr. Sunil Kumar Swain, learned counsel and his associates enter appearance on behalf of the Opposite Parties by filing a Vakalatnama in Court today, which be kept on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 4. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “The petitioner under the above stated facts and circumstances sincerely prays before the // 2 // Hon’ble Court to direct the OP No.1, [Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, Balasore Zonal office] to enhance the wages at par with the initial basic pay with D.A. paid to Regular substaff of the Bank w.e.f. 2020 and also revise the same as and when the wage revision takes place and oblige. And/or may pass such order/orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.” 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis by the UCO Bank, Karanjia Branch on 23.03.2016 and has been getting Rs.300/- per day. Challenging the low wages paid to the Petitioner, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 6. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the para-55 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi(3), reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, submitted before this Court that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically observed that the Division Bench of the High Court should have directed that wages equal to the salary that is being paid to regular employees be paid to these daily-wage employees with effect from the date of its judgment. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court modified that part of the judgment of the High Court and directed that daily- wage earners be paid wages equal to the salary at the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in the Commercial Taxes // 3 // Department in government service, from the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court. In view of the aforesaid clear legal position, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Opposite Parties be directed to pay wages as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umadevi(3)’s case (supra). 7. On a careful consideration of the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and on examination of the materials on record, this Court also observes that the Petitioner has been engaged as DLR in the Karanjia Branch of the Bank. Likewise, similarly situated other persons have been engaged at different branches of the Bank, who are working on daily wage basis as DLR employees. This Court further observes that although they have been working as DLR on regular basis, they have been paid very low salary by the Bank, which according to this Court, amounts to exploitation of labour forced by the employer. Further, this Court, from para-55 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umadevi(3)’s case (supra), observes that a clear direction has been given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to pay wages to the daily-wage earners which is equal to the salary of the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in government service, from the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court. In the aforesaid context, it would be profitable to refer to para-55 of the judgment of // 4 // the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umadevi(3)’s case (supra), which is extracted herein below:- in to to service “55. In cases relating the Commercial Taxes Department, the High Court has directed that those engaged on daily wages, be paid wages equal the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in government service, with effect from the dates from which they were respectively appointed. The objection taken was to the direction for payment from the dates of engagement. We find that the High Court had clearly gone wrong in directing that these employees be paid salary equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in government service, with effect from the dates from which they were respectively engaged or appointed. It was not open to the High Court to impose such an obligation on the State when the very question before the High Court in the case was whether these employees were entitled to have equal pay for equal work so called and were entitled to any other benefit. They had also been engaged in the teeth of directions not to do so. We are, therefore, of the view that, at best, the Division Bench of the High Court should have directed that wages equal to the salary that is being paid to regular employees be paid to these daily- wage employees with effect from the date of its judgment. Hence, that part of the direction of the Division Bench is modified and it is directed that these daily wage earners be paid wages equal to the salary at the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in the Commercial Taxes Department in government service, from the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High // 5 // Court. Since, they are only daily wage earners, there would be no question of other allowances being paid to them. In view of our conclusion, that Courts are not expected to issue directions for making such persons permanent in service, we set aside that part of the direction of the High Court directing the Government to consider their cases for regularization. We also notice that the High Court has not adverted to the aspect as to whether it was regularization or it was giving permanency that was being directed by the High Court. In such a situation, the direction in that regard will stand deleted and the appeals filed by the State would stand allowed to that extent. If sanctioned posts are vacant (they are said to be vacant) the State will take immediate steps for filling those posts by a regular process of selection. But when regular recruitment is undertaken, the respondents in CAs Nos. 3595- the Commercial Taxes 3612 and Department similarly situated, will be allowed to compete, waiving the age restriction imposed for the recruitment and giving some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a significant period of time. That would be the extent of the exercise of power by this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution to do justice to them.” those in 8. A similarly placed employee had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.7821 of 2014 (Sri Satya Narayan Pattnaik v. Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, Zonal Office, C-2, Ashok Nagar, Bhubaneswar & another). A coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 10.11.2014 disposed of the said writ petition directing the // 6 // Opposite Party-Bank to pay wages to the daily-wage earners equal to the salary of the lowest paid employees of their cadre in the services of the Bank from the date of filing of the writ petition. 9. In view of the aforesaid settled position of law, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party-Bank to consider the case of the Petitioner and to grant them wages as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Umadevi(3)’s case (supra) as well as the judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Satya Narayan Pattnaik’s case. Accordingly, the Opposite Parties are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner and grant such benefits as due and admissible to the Petitioner within a period of two months from the date of communication of a copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK. Date: 18-Dec-2023 11:27:32