Holding

Contract daily‑wage clerks may be regularised and receive equal pay only if their appointment complies with the statutory recruitment rules and the guidelines laid down in State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, with age relaxation permissible for the period of service rendered.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined the claim of daily‑wage contract clerks employed by the State of Haryana for regularisation and equal pay with regular clerks. The High Court had ordered their regularisation and payment of equal wages, which the State appealed. The Court held that any appointment or regularisation must conform to the statutory recruitment rules and the guidelines laid down in State of Haryana v. Piara Singh. It directed that, provided the claimants are otherwise eligible, age relaxation may be granted for the period they have served and, upon regular appointment, they are entitled to pay on par with regular clerks. The Court also directed the appropriate authorities to take disciplinary action against officers who effected illegal recruitment. Consequently, the appeals were allowed and the High Court’s orders were set aside, subject to the stated directions.

Issues considered

Whether daily‑wage contract employees are entitled to regularisation and equal pay under the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Whether such regularisation can be effected when the original recruitment did not comply with statutory rules and guidelines.
Whether age relaxation can be granted to candidates who have become age‑barred due to their period of service.
Whether the High Court’s order granting regularisation and equal pay is maintainable.
Whether the Court can direct disciplinary action against erring officers.

Subjects

regularisationdaily wage employeesequal pay for equal workservice lawrecruitment rulesage relaxationdisciplinary actionpublic service appointments

Judgment

STATE OF HARYANA A
v.
SURINDER KUMAR AND ORS.

MARCH 10, 1997

[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.) B

Service Law :

Regularisation----Daily wage employees-Claim for parity in pay with
regular employees and for regularisation-Held, the Government would con-
sider the cases of the claimants, in accordance with law and guidelines laid c
down by this Court* for their appointment to service, provided they are
otherwise eligible-Age-relaxation to be given to the extent they have
worked-From the date of appointment on regular basis they will be entitled
to equal pay on par with Regular clerks-Recruitment was not made in
accordance with rules-Authorities would rectify the e"ors and take suitable D
actions against erring Officers.
.
'
*State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, [1992] 4 SCC 118, relied on.

State of Haryana & Ors. v. Jasmer Singh & Ors. JT (1996) 10 SC 876,
referred to. E
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1969-70
of 1997.

From the Judgment and Order dated 23.11.95/28.7.95 of the Punjab
& Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Nos. 15828/95 and 1479 of 1995. F
. Prem Malhotra and Jasbir Malik for the Appellants.

Manoj Swarup for the respondents.

The following order of the Court was delivered : G
Order dated 2.8.1996 is recalled. Special Leave Petitions are
restofrd.

--"i" Leave granted. These .appeals by special leave arise from the judg-
ment of the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, dated H
917
918 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A November 23. 1995 and July 28, 1995 in C.W.P. Nos. 15828/95 and 1479/95
respectively.

The admitted position is that the respondents came to be appointed
as daily wagers on contract basis to the post of Clerk. They filed writ
petition in the' High Court for their regularisation. The High Court in the
B impugned order has directed payment of wages on the principle of equal
pay for equal work and also regularisation of their services. Thus these
appeals, by special leave. -
The controversy is no longer res judicata. This Court in State of
c Harya11a v. Piara Singh, (1992] 4 SCC 118 has laid down the guidelines for
appointment by recruitment and if need be by regularisation of class IV
employees. As a consequence, any appointment made to the service shall
be in accordance with the statutory rules and also the guidelines laid down
thereunder. T,herefore, the appellant is directed to consider their cases in
accordance with law and guidelines laid down therein for appointment of
D
the respondents to the service as per law provided they are otherwise
eligible. If they have become age-barred, age may be relaxed for the p1:riod
they have worked. On appointment, from that date they will be entitled to
.•
equal pay on par with the regular clerks.
' .,..
E Shri Manoj Swarup, learned counsel for the respondents, contends
that the post held by the respondents are interchangeable and in fact they "
have been interchanged to enable them to hold the posts. That contention
cannot be given acceptance for the reason that since the respondents were
appointed on contract basis on daily wages, they cannot have any right to
F a post as such until they are duly selected and appointed. Merely because
they are able to manage to have the posts interchanged, they cannot
become entitled to the same pay-scale which the regular clerks are holding
by claiming that they are discharging their duties as regular employees. The
very object of selection is to test the eligibility and then to make selection
in accordance with rules prescribed for recruitment. Obviously the
G respondents' recruitment was not made in accordance with the rules. this
Court has also pointed out in State of Haryana & Ors. v. Jasmer Singh &
Ors., JT (1996) 10 SC 876 in that behalf. If any illegal actions have been
taken by the officers after recruitment, it would be a grave matter of
indiscipline by the officers and the higher authorities are directed to look {

H into the matter and see that such actions are rectified, by that would not
STATE v. SURINqiR KR. 919

be a matter for this Court to give legitimacy to illegal acts done by the A
officers and to grant relief on the basis of wrong or illegal actions of
superior officers. The appropriate authority would look into and take
.,.. suitable disciplinary action against the erring officers and submit the report
.,I of the action taken and the result thereof to the Registry of this Court.

.I
I . The appeals are accordingly .allowed and the orders of the High
Court stand set aside, but the direbtions that w~uld be followed are as
B·

indicated in the judgment. It is needless to mention that they would take
expeditious action in following the directions. No costs.

R.P . Appeals allowed.

.