JUDGMENT 1. :- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the allegations that in response to an advertisement he has applied for the post of Helper (Electrician) and was awarded highest marks by the selection committee and was thereafter appointed as such for a period of one year vide office order dated 31-7-1992 (Annx.1), to be paid at the rate of Rs. 1250/- per month and, thereafter, his term of appointment was extended from time vide orders dated 4-11-1992, 5-2-1993, 22-3-1993, 24-6-1993, 6-10-1993, 31-1-1994, 28-6-1994 and 20-12-1994 (Annexures No.2 to 9 respectively) and he had been continuously working as Helper since the date of his appointment and for all this period he has been paid at the above said rate. He has claimed the same salary as is being paid to the regular Helper. 2. The writ petition has been contested and, in the reply, it has been stated that the petitioner was engaged on contract basis and an agreement in this respect was also entered into between the parties and, as such, principle of "equal pay for equal work" does not apply. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 4. On enquiry by the court, Shri S.M. Poddar, the learned counsel for the respondents, after seeking instructions from Shri Mahesh Sharma, has admitted that the petitioner's attendance is marked in attendance register maintained in the office and he is supposed to be present in the office during the office hours and is not free to go home at any time after finishing the work available for the day. It is also not disputed that if he remains absent he has to take leave. It is thus dear that the position of the petitioner is not that of a contractor but is an employee of the respondents. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has been doing the same work which a regular Helper does. It, therefore, cannot be said that he principle of "equal pay for equal work" does not apply to the case of the petitioner. 5. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has been doing the same work which a regular Helper does. It, therefore, cannot be said that he principle of "equal pay for equal work" does not apply to the case of the petitioner. 5. Consequently while allowing the writ petition, it is directed that the respondents should pay to the petitioner salary on the minimum of the scale of Helper (Elect-ician) besides D.A. and other allowances payable the similarly situated persons, who have not been appointed on regular basis, with effect from 1-1-1994. The arrears should be paid to the petitioner within a period of one month from today. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of with no orders as to costs.Petition allowed. *******