Page No.# 1/5 GAHC020005972023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/250/2023 SMTI. A CHAKRABORTY D/O LATE S BHATTACHARJEE R/O PWD COLONY DIMAPUR NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND 2:THE COMMISIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND DEPT. OF NPWD (R AND B) KOHIMA NAGALAND 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER NPWD(R AND B) KOHIMA NAGALAND 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD (R AND B) DIVISION DIMAPUR NAGALAND 5:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICE PWD(R AND B) DHANSIRIPAR SUB DIVISION DIMAPUR NAGALAND ------------ Advocate for : TOSHITEMJEN PONGENER Advocate for : GOVT ADV NL appearing for THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 03-03-2025 Heard Mr. Toshitemjen, learned counsel for the peti- tioner. Also heard Ms. S. Mere, learned Sr. Government Advocate for the State respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner leading to the filing of this writ petition is that vide order No.DPR/2/2000-01/222-28 dated 10.11.2000, he was appointed as Work Charge Labour at fixed pay of Rs.750/- per month, under the establishment of the Sub Divisional Officer PWD (R&B) Dhansiripar, Dimapur, Nagaland. His monthly salary was enhanced from Rs.750/- to Rs.5200/- per month, and continued in service in the same post since then. However, even after completion of more than 23 years of service in the department, his service has neither been regularized nor given scale of pay, whereas the case of others similarly situated person have already been considered and given scale of pay. 3. Under the circumstances, the petitioners approached the respondent authorities more particularly the respondent No.3 by submitting representation dated 11.8.2023, with a request for giving equal pay for equal work and to give him scale of pay. Ac- cording to the petitioner, he is discharging the same duty as in the case of the other Grade-IV employees, who are under the same establishment and enjoying the scale of pay. Therefore, he should also be allowed to enjoy the same scale of pay. However, Page No.# 3/5 the petitioner’s representation has not been attended and con- sidered by the authorities till date. 4. Aggrieved by non-consideration of his representation, the petitioner have filed the instant writ petition seeking direc- tion against the respondent authorities to consider his case for grant of minimum scale of pay as in the case of the other grade IV employees. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has given reliefs to similarly situated employees in WP(C)165(K)/2018,WP(C)166(K)/2018,WP(C)167(K)/2018, W.P(C)168(K)/2018 and in W.P.(C)119/2020 wherein similarly sit- uated employees under the Government of Nagaland were granted scale of pay. Further, the learned counsel for the peti- tioner submits that by judgment and order dated 14.9.2022, passed in WA 25/2022 filed by the State of Nagaland against the order of the learned Single Judge, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court while dismissing the Writ Appeal has observed that “… the writ petitioners performs the same nature of works and du- ties as that discharged by regular Sweepers and is entitled to equal pay as that received by the regular Sweepers…” and di- rected the state respondents to carry out the orders of the learned Single Judge. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the aforementioned decided cases and therefore, prays that the present petitioner be given similar relief. 6. However, at this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has submitted repre- sentation before the concerned authorities for grant of scale of Page No.# 4/5 pay, the respondents may be directed to dispose of the same by giving him a scale of pay as has been given to the similarly situ- ated persons. 7. Ms. S. Mere, learned Sr. Government Advocate for the state submits that there are many similar cases pending be- fore this Court, and in this regard the Government has now con- stituted a committee who has submitted report on the issue of regulation of pay, remuneration and condition of service of con- tingency and fixed paid employees. She further submits that in the meeting held on 29.01.2025, chaired by the Chief Secretary the Committee while reviewing the status of the Committee Re- port has decided that in the interim, “…the wages be raised by 50% of the current remuneration for those drawing equal or less than Rs.7050, which is the highest slab of the current minimum wage.Further, all employees drawing less than the current mini- mum wage shall be entitled to the minimum of the current rate plus 50% irrespective of the current remuneration…” The above decision however, are being placed before the Cabinet, there- fore, if the petitioners are satisfied with the current decision on the Committee report, the matter may be placed after the deci- sion of the Cabinet. However, since the petitioners has limited prayer at this stage for disposal of the representation submitted by the petitioner, the writ petition may be disposed of by direct- ing the State respondents to consider the petitioner’s represen- tation by giving sufficient time to the government to dispose the petitioner’s representation taking into account the decision on the Committe report in this regard. Page No.# 5/5 8. In view of the above submissions made by both the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is dis- posed of with a direction to the concerned authority to examined and disposed of the representation submitted by the petitioner taking into account that the State has taken some decisions re- garding regulation of pay remuneration and condition of fixed pay employees and also considering that the similarly situated employees have already been granted reliefs in compliance of the direction by our own High Court in the above referred cases. 9. The petitioner may also submit a fresh representa- tion giving his service detail along with copy of this order, and the State respondents shall dispose of the same within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of such fresh representa- tion along with a copy of this order. 10. With the above observations and direction, the writ petitions stands disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant