JUDGMENT 1. The question involved in this writ petition is a short one and stands a ready decided by the Apex Court. 2. The petitioner, Mohd Ayub, has been working, since November 1986, as Chowkidar in the unit of respondent No. 1 on daily wages basis. His contention is that though the work of Chowkidar is being taken from him, but the salary of Chowkidar is not being paid to him. It is stated that the State Government has created the post of Chowkidar in the unit of respondent No. 1. He, therefore, seeks direction to respondent No. 1 to pay him the salary of Chowkidar. 3. Despite numerous opportunities granted to the respondents, no reply was filed. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We have also gone through the various documents filed by the petitioner. 5. The documents show that the posts of Chowkidars have been created in the unit of respondent No. 1 by the State of Rajasthan. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been working as Chowkidar since November, 1986. As such, on the principle of equal pay for equal work, he should be given the salary of a Chowkidar. It is unfortunate that despite protest being raised by the petitioner before respondent No. 1, his grievance for payment of the salary of Chowkidar has not been redressed. 6. In Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U. P. (1986) 1 SCC 637 and Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-Chief, CPWD (1986) 1 SCC 639 , their Lordships of the Supreme Court have laid down the principle that there should be equal pay for equal work. We, therefore, find no justification on the part of respondent No. 1 in not giving the salary of a Chowkidar to the petitioner. 7. In the result, we allow the writ petition and direct the respondents to pay the salary in regular pay scale of a Chowkidar to the petitioner from November, 1986 and onwards. 8. The parties are left to bear their own costs.Petition allowed. *******