( 1 ) HAVING considered the facts we are of the opinion that this matter is covered by a decision of this court entitled Niadar and Another v. Delhi Administration and Another which was decided on 29/09/1988. In terms thereof thus, we direct the Delhi Administration to absorb the petitioners in accordance with the prepared scheme for absorbing casual labourers, which scheme has been made effective from October I, 1988. In terms of the scheme, any casual labourer who has worked for one year or more in the Horticulture Department shall be regularised within a period of six months from today if such casual labourer is otherwise fit to be regularised under the scheme as regular employee. On that footing each casual labourer working in the department shall get salary or wages at the rate equivalent to the minimum salary paid to a regular employee in comparable post in the Horticulture Department.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has also contended that the expression salary or wages used in Niadar case and which has been used instantly also has given rise to a doubt in the department as to whether on regularisation minimum wage is to be paid or minimum salary to the regular employee, and on that about Rs. 750. 00 per month instead of rs 1100 per month has been paid to some of the employees.

( 3 ) Learned counsel for the Delhi Administration disputes this fact and says that it was always meant and always shall mean that minimum salary plusallowances which comes to about Rs. 1,100. 00 has been paid to such employees and is otherwise payable. This clarifies the doubt expressed.

( 4 ) The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in these terms.

( 5 ) No costs.