Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1998 DIGILAW 899 (SC)

Urmila Devi v. State Of Bihar

1998-08-10

M.JAGANNADHA RAO, S.B.MAJMUDAR

body1998
ORDER : S.B. Majmudar, J. - The five petitioners in this petition have a grievance that they have been working as Voluntary Workers since long in the Health Service of the respondent-State at the pittance of Rs 50 per month and they are still not regularised. Their grievance was rejected by the High Court in writ petition and writ appeal by holding that they had no statutory right of regularisation. 2. We have heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondent-State. In our view, the grievance of the petitioners that the persons similarly situated like them have been given a better treatment and have been regularised cannot be pressed into service as learned counsel for the respondent-State stated that they were wrongly regularised. It is obvious that one wrong cannot be multiplied by another wrong. However, we feel that the petitioners have a just grievance as they are working since years as Voluntary Workers on a payment of Rs 50 per month which is almost a pittance. It is high time the respondent-State considered the question of regularising them on available posts as per rules and regulations. This exercise should be undertaken by the State authorities within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order by the Civil Surgeon, Gopalganj. The office shall send a copy of this order to the Civil Surgeon, Gopalganj for information and necessary action. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has one more grievance that even the payment of Rs 50 per month is not being made to the petitioners since 1993. If that is so, it will be open to the petitioners to file written representations to the Civil Surgeon, Gopalganj about clearance of their arrears of remuneration at the rate of Rs 50 per month from 1993 onwards up to date if they are not so paid. If the Civil Surgeon is convinced about the said claim for the arrears, the same would also be paid up to the petitioners. 4. Subject to these directions, this special leave petition is disposed of. Court Masters