Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 758 (JHR)

Parmeshwar Sao v. Central Coalfilds Limited

2010-07-26

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2010
Order Heard the parties. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to appoint him on the regular basis on the post of Dozer Operator and to provide him the admissible salary for the said post since 1996 as because the petitioner has been continuously discharging the duties of Dozer Operator on the orders and directions of the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Coal Cutter in 1990. Subsequently, in November, 2001, he was sent for training of Dozer Operator Course. After the training, on the orders and directions of the respondents, the petitioner was performing the duties of Dozer Operator as well as of Loader since 1996. It is further stated that now the respondents are taking work of Dozer Operator from him. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that though as per the orders and directions of the respondents he is discharging the duties of Dozer Operator since 1996 but he is not being paid the salary admissible for the post of Dozer Operator rather he is being paid the salary for the post of Loader only. He represented before the respondents for appointing/promoting him to the post of Dozer Operator by filing a representation on 27.7.2001, contained in Annexure-4 to the writ petition, but the respondents did not take any action on his representation. Accordingly, prayer has been made to direct the respondents to appoint him on regular basis for the post of Dozer Operator and to pay him the salary for the post of Dozer Operator since the date he is discharging the duties as such. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is stated that the employment of the petitioner has been designated as Under Ground Loader, Group-VA and he was posted at Giridih Open Cast Project. He was initially appointed as Under Ground Loader at Govindpur Project of Kathara Area under the category of Group VA of piece rated but thereafter on his own request he was transferred to Giridih, i.e. where he is presently posted, though there was no underground mines project at Giridih, and as a matter of fact the Underground Loader,• Group-VA is deployed in the underground mines only. Since there were no underground mines at Giridih Project where the petitioner was posted and, therefore, the Management of Giridih Project sent him for training of Dozer Operator alongwith other workers for their fruitful utilization. The Management with a bona fide intention after the completion of training allowed the petitioner to work as Dozer Operator at Giridih Open Cast Project so that in future if any vacancy arises at Giridih Open Cast Project, the petitioner may be given preference on account of his experience as Dozer Operator. 6. The respondents have not disputed that the petitioner is discharging the duties of a Dozer Operator since 1996 but he is being paid the salary of a Loader only. According to the respondents, the petitioner has been authorized to work as Dozer Operator Trainee and he is not working as full-fledged Dozer Operator. Such stand of the respondents does not stand to the reasons. It cannot be accepted that the petitioner is getting training since the last 14 years for the post of Dozer Operator. Even if, it is accepted that the petitioner has not been regularly appointed to the post of Dozer Operator but the fact remains that undisputedly the petitioner is working as Dozer Operator since 1996 on the orders directions of the respondents. At one hand the respondents are taking work from the petitioner as Dozer Operator since 1996 whereas he is being paid the salary of a Loader, i.e. in a lower scale, which, in my view, appears to be unjustified. If the petitioner is not entitled to the salary of Dozer Operator as he has not been appointed on the said post on regular basis but at least he would be entitled to extra remuneration/allowance for the duties he is discharging for the post of Dozer Operator. 7. For the reasons stated hereinabove, this writ petition is being disposed of with directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for his appointment as Dozer Operator on regular basis as and when the vacancy arises. 8. The respondents shall also consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically and shall pass an appropriate orders within a period of two months for payment of extra remuneration/allowance to the petitioner for the period he discharged the duties of Dozer Operator. 9. This writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and directions.