The Excise Department gave an advertisement in the newspaper for certain vacancies of subordinate staff under the signature of Bhuwan. In the advertisement it was clearly mentioned that such staff will be paid the daily

The facts of the case study are like that of the case of Dhirendra Chamoli and Anr. v. State of U.P. (AIR 1982 SC 879). In this case, the Court stated: "The fact that these employees accepted employment with full knowledge that they will be paid only daily wages and they will not get the same salary and conditions of service as other Class IV employees, cannot provide an escape to the Central Government to avoid the mandate of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. This Article declares that there shall be equality before the law and equal protection of the law and implicit in it is the further principle that there must be equal pay for work of equal value. These employees who are in the service of the different Nehru Yuvak Kendras in the country and who are admittedly performing the same duties as Class IV employees, must therefore get the same salary and conditions of service as Class IV employees. It makes no difference whether they are appointed in sanctioned posts or not. So long as they are performing the same duties, they must receive the same salary and conditions of service as Class IV employees." Considering the aforementioned case law, it can be concluded that the contention of the excise department that the newly hired subordinate staff were appointed on a daily wage basis, applied in response to a departmental advertisement, and accepted the terms of their employment is not tenable.