Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Despite notice, none appears on
behalf of the respondent.
Briefly stated, the facts are as follows.
The respondent was engaged as a casual labour sometimes in the year 1985.
In 1993, a scheme was formulated stating that casual labours would be given temporary
status of Group ’D’ cadre posts. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent raised the dispute
before the Division Bench of the High Court in Special Civil Application No.6369 of
2001. By its impugned order, the Division Bench of the High Court directed that the
respondent be given pay protection in Group ’C’ posts. In our view, the High Court has
erred in giving such direction. The scheme for temporary status was formulated in 1993
only for Group ’D’ temporary posts. No such scheme has been formulated for the
protection of Group ’C’ posts.
In that view of the matter, the order of the High Court is set aside. Appeal is
allowed. No costs.
( H.K. SEMA )