Devnarayan Hostel, Nagar, District Bharatpur. vs State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary, Social

Smt. Rukko Devi W/o Shri Deviram, Aged About 48 Years, presently working as Cook, Govt. Ambedkar Hostel Kaman, District Bharatpur (Raj.)

4. Smt. Chandrakala W/o Shri Kundan Singh, Aged about 56 Years, presently working as Cook, Govt. Girls Hostel, Sabora, Kumher, District Bharatpur (Raj.)

5. Ramesh Chand S/o Shri Man Singh, Aged about 30 Years, presently working as Cook, Government Ambedkar Hostel, Kumher, District Bharatpur.

6. Balram Yadav S/o Shri Ramcharan Yadav, Aged about 42 Years, presently working as Cook, Government Devnarayan Hostel, Nagar, District Bharatpur. ----Petitioners Versus

1. State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

2. The Director, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, 22, Raj Bhawan Road, Ambedkar Nagar, Civil Lines, Jaipur (Raj.)

3. The Deputy Director, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Bhardwaj, through VC Mr. Azad Ahmed For Respondent(s) : [2025:RJ-JP:8925] (2 of 5) [CW-14710/2019] JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/02/2025

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following payer:- “It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to admit and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to: (i) Quash and set aside the E-Tender No.SJE01/2029- 20 (SOC1920A0048) Dated 18.07.2019 for appointment of Cook/Chowkidar through New Placement Agency. (ii) Respondents be directed not to terminate the services of the petitioners; (iii) Respondents be directed to make the payment of minimum pay scale salary to the Petitioners in compliance of the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court; (iv) Respondents also be directed to make the payment considering the petitioners as full time employee with all consequential benefits, since date of joining; (v) Any other order or relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioners; (vi) Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the petitioners.”

2. By way of filing of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking directions for their regularization on the post of Cook/Chowkidar and an alternative prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondents for payment of minimum of pay scale.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not pressing their prayer for regularization, but are pressing their prayer for getting minimum of the pay scale. Counsel submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been set at rest by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, [2025:RJ-JP:8925] (3 of 5) [CW-14710/2019] while deciding a batch of writ petitions with the lead case of Anokha Bai Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.372/2013. Counsel submits that the instant writ petition be also disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to submit detailed comprehensive representation with regard to redressal of their grievance in the light of judgment passed by this Court in the case of Anokha Bai (supra) and the respondents be directed to decide the same in the light of the aforesaid judgment within the fixed time span.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners, but he is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and submits that some of the petitioners have already been granted the benefit of minimum of the pay scale and in case, the rest of the petitioners submit any representation in this regard, the authorities would always examine their case independently and pass appropriate orders.

5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

6. The controversy involved in this petition has already been set at rest by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Anokha Bai (supra) with the following observations and directions:- “The sanction of post is an administrative decision. If the plea taken by the respondents is accepted then the Government can very well evolve the mechanism to avoid implementation of the judgment in the case of Jagjit Singh (supra). It is by sanctioning all the posts by framing scheme so as to state that posts are [2025:RJ-JP:8925] (4 of 5) [CW-14710/2019] not sanctioned under the Service Rules but under the Scheme. It is quite surprising and shocking that though he petitioners are working for last 10 to 15 years yet they have to approach this Court to get minimum wages provided under the Act of 1948. It is now provided when an order was passed by this Court to find out as to under what provision, the placement agencies have been engaged to employ the persons like the petitioners. Whether they are paid at the rate of minimum wages. It is with the pursuation of the Additional Advocate General – Mr.GS Gill and Mr.Anurag Sharma that the State Government agree to pay at least minimum wages provided under the Act of 1948 otherwise the petitioners were not even getting wages as per the statutory provisions. In the light of the discussion made above, I am inclined to accept the prayer made by the petitioners for grant of wages at the rate of minimum of the pay scale for the post of Cook and Watchman while denying the benefit of regularisation sought by them, as otherwise not pressed by the petitioners. All the writ petitions are accordingly allowed with the direction to the respondents to pay wages to the petitioners at the rate of minimum of the pay scale. The benefit aforesaid would be given to the petitioners from the date of pronouncement of the judgment. The compliance of this judgment would be made by the respondents within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.”

7. Since the controversy involved in this writ petition has already been set at rest in the case of Anokha Bai (supra) and looking to the fact that during pendency of this petition, some of the petitioners have been granted the benefit of minimum of the pay scale and thus the present petitioners are also entitled to get similar benefits.

8. The instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to submit representations within a period of one [2025:RJ-JP:8925] (5 of 5) [CW-14710/2019] month from today. The respondents are directed to decide the representations of the petitioners in the light of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Anokha Bai (supra) within a period of three months thereafter and pass reasoned and speaking orders strictly in accordance with law.

9. With the observation aforesaid, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

10. Stay application and all application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. GARIMA /175 (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J