Allowed

M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. and Others v. Prescribed Authority Unver Payment and Anr.

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2021WRIC/12427/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the Labour Enforcement Officer to initiate proceedings against the petitioner's purchase centre. Applying its earlier decision in M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd, the court held the proceedings were quashed as purchase centres do not qualify as 'shops' under the relevant Act.

What did the court decide?

Case No. P.W.A. 02/2012 and Case No. P.W.A 06/2012 were quashed and set aside.

M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. and Others Vs… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12427 of 2012

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. And Others Respondent :- Prescribed Authority Unver Payment And Anr.

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shakti Swarup Nigam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Karshit Nigam, submits that the controversy stands concluded with the judgment of this Court rendered in Writ C No. 13990 of 2012 (M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. and others Vs. Assitant Labour Commissioner and another).

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid proposition.

¶8

In M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd, this Court held thus:

¶9

"The petition arises out of the proceeding initiated by the second respondent, Labour Enforcement Officer, Shambhal, District Moradabad, under Section 15(2) of Payment of Wages Act, 1936, read with Section 18 of U.P. Dookan and Vanijya Adhishthan Adhinium, 1962 (for short, 'Act, 1962').

¶10

It is urged that petitioner, Establishment/Sugar Mill is not a shop within the meaning of sub-section 16 of Section 2 of the Act, 1962, since the said

¶11

premises is a purchase centre and no whole-sale or retail trade or business is carried on or services are rendered to the customers. A dispute was raised by the Labour Enforcement Officer, Shambhal, District Moradabad, in Case No. PWA 02/2012 that the provisions of Minimum Wages Act are applicable in respect of the workmen working in the aforesaid purchase centre. Number of objections, including that the proceedings are not maintainable, as such, purchase centres are not 'shops' or 'commercial establishments' within the meaning of the Act, 1962.

¶12

The entire proceedings initiated by the second respondent is being assailed for want of jurisdiction. In support of his submission, learned Senior Counsel has placed reliance on a decision of this Court rendered in Mool Chand Sharma vs. General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. and others, reported in 1999 Allahabad Law Journal, 951.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel on being confronted with the report does not dispute the proposition of law being advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶14

In view thereof, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The proceedings of Case No. P.W.A. 02/2012, "Labour Enforcement Officer, Shambhal District Bhim Nagar vs. M/s Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. & others, is quashed and set aside."

¶15

In wake of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties the judgment rendered in M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd is squarely applicable to the facts of this case. This writ petition is liable to be allowed in terms of M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd (supra).

¶16

The proceedings of Case No. P.W.A 06/2012, "Labour Enforcement Officer, Shambhal District Bhim Nagar Vs. M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd and others are liable to be set aside and are set

¶17

aside.

¶18

The writ petition is allowed.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.10.2021 Nadeem

M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. and Others v. Prescribed Authority Unver Payment and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. and Others v. Prescribed Authority Unver Payment and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Triveni Engineering and Industries Limited Vs State of U.P. and Others

Laxmiratan Cotton Mills Vs P.O. Labour Court-I Kanpur and Others

M/S. British India Corporation Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and Others

Chaudhari Charan Singh University Vs Presiding Officer and 2 Others

Ram Lakhan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vinod Kumar Pande Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others