Disposed¶45

Vipin Kumar v. Labour Enforcement Officer and Ors.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2025CRL.M.C./145/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.M.C. 145/2025; Delhi High Court; Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J.; 14.01.2025; Vipin Kumar v. Labour Enforcement Officer & Ors.; National Institute of Plant Genome Research; section 528 BNSS; Article 227 Constitution of India; Minimum Wages Act 1948; section 20(5); section 20(5)(b); recovery of wages as fine; execution before JMFC Patiala House; delay in execution; W.P.(C) 1512/2023; no stay operating; Rs.1,50,582/-; direction to Magistrate to proceed expeditiously; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Magistrate to proceed with the application pending before that court as expeditiously as feasible, in accordance with law; pending applications, if any, disposed of. No costs or compensation awarded. ¶45

Vipin Kumar Vs Labour Enforcement Officer and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶45

Issue for consideration

Maintainability of the present petition under section 528 of the BNSS, contended by respondent No.3 on the ground that the proceedings before the learned Magistrate arise from an order passed by the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act. +2 more

¶32

Court's answer

Under section 20(5) of the Minimum Wages Act, any amount directed to be paid under section 20 is recoverable as a 'fine' imposed by a Magistrate; where the Authority is not a Magistrate, it is recoverable by any Magistrate to whom the Authority makes application, as if it were a fine imposed by such Magistrate.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

Since the authority under the Minimum Wages Act has filed the requisite recovery application before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (now Judicial Magistrate First Class under the BNSS), there is no reason why the learned Magistrate should not proceed to recover the amount, especially as no stay operates against such recovery in view of para 11 of the order dated 06.02.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 1512/2023.

¶43

Key takeaways

The petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Magistrate to proceed with the application pending before that court as expeditiously as feasible, in accordance with law; in view of the limited prayer, no written response was required.ratio¶45
Any fresh application seeking stay of recovery of the amount awarded under the Minimum Wages Act would be considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the civil writ proceedings independent of the observations in this order, and any order passed there would be brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate.obiter¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J.), CRL.M.C. 145/2025, decided 14.01.2025 — Petition under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 read with Article 227 of the Constitution by Vipin Kumar seeking a direction to the learned JMFC, Patiala House District Courts, New Delhi to proceed with execution of order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and to dispose of the recovery in a time-bound manner; costs and compensation also sought against respondents Nos.2 and 3 for delay. Considering section 20(5) of the Minimum Wages Act, the court held that any amount directed to be paid under section 20 is recoverable as a 'fine' imposed by a Magistrate, and where the Authority is not a Magistrate, by any Magistrate to whom the Authority makes application. Since the Authority's application dated 27.04.2023 under section 20(5)(b) was pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (now Judicial Magistrate First Class under the BNSS), and no stay operated against recovery in view of para 11 of order dated 06.02.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1512/2023, the Magistrate was directed to proceed with the pending application as expeditiously as feasible, in accordance with law. A maintainability objection under section 528 BNSS was urged by respondent No.3/National Institute of Plant Genome Research; the court proceeded on the section 20(5) scheme and disposed of the petition, leaving any fresh stay application to the Co-ordinate Bench in the civil writ proceedings.

¶1

$~201

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶4

VIPIN KUMAR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Utsav Jain, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

LABOUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND ORS

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr. G.D. Sharma, Advocate for R-3.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

¶10

O R D E R % 14.01.2025

¶11

CRL.M.A. 817/2025 (exemption)

¶12

Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions.

¶13

The application stands disposed-of.

¶14

CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶15

By way of the present petition filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 („BNSS‟) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to the learned JMFC, Patiala House District Courts, New Delhi to proceed with execution of order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 („Minimum Wages Act‟) and to dispose-of the same in a time-bound manner.

¶16

CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶17

Page 1 of 5

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 15:44:35

¶20

The petitioner also seeks award of costs and compensation against respondents Nos.2 and 3 for undue delay in compliance of order dated 28.11.2022.

¶21

Mr. Utsav Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that pursuant to order dated 28.11.2022, the authority under the Minimum Wages Act moved an application dated 27.04.2023 under section 20(5)(b) before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House District Courts, New Delhi for recovery of the amount awarded as fine and the prayer in the application reads as under :

¶22

“ It is, therefore respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to summon the O.P. No.2 for depositing the aforesaid payment through demand draft/pay order in favour of employee failing which a sum of Rs.1,50,582/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand five hundred eighty two only) may be recovered from the O.P. No.2 as if it were a fine imposed by this Hon’ble Court and remit the same to the applicant for disbursement to employee. ”

¶23

(bold in original)

¶24

Mr. Jain has taken the court through the order-sheets of the proceedings before the learned Magistrate, to submit that as will be seen from the order-sheets, after having issued notice to the respondents in those proceedings vide order dated 18.11.2023, the proceedings before the learned Magistrate have not progressed any further despite the respondents having been duly served and having entered appearance as of February, 2024 and having been granted sufficient time to file a written response. Copies of the order-sheets of the proceedings before the learned Magistrate have been appended to the present petition.

¶25

CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶26

Page 2 of 5

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 15:44:35

¶29

Learned counsel submits, that in order to allay any doubt on the part of the learned Magistrate, it has been repeatedly clarified that the proceedings before the learned Magistrate have not been stayed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in W.P.(C) No. 1512/2023. Attention in this behalf is drawn to para 11 of order dated 06.02.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid matter, wherein the Coordinate Bench has observed that no ground is made-out for staying the order, except that any payment made in the matter would be subject to the outcome of that writ petition. A copy of order dated 06.02.2023 as been appended to the present petition.

¶30

Upon being queried, Mr. Jain informs the court that the amount payable in matter is about Rs. 1.5 lacs.

¶31

In the above view of the matter, issue notice.

¶32

Mr. G.D. Sharma, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No.3/National Institute of Plant Genome Research (contesting respondent) on advance copy; accepts notice; and submits that the present petition is not maintainable under the provision of section 528 of the BNSS since the proceedings before the learned Magistrate arise from an order passed by the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act.

¶33

Mr. Sharma further submits, that he proposes to move a fresh application citing fresh grounds seeking stay of execution of the award in the civil writ proceedings pending before the Co-ordinate Bench of this court.

¶34

On point of maintainability, it is necessary to consider the provisions of section 20(5) of the Minimum Wages Act, which read as under :

¶35

CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶36

Page 3 of 5

¶37

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 15:44:35

¶38

“ (5) Any amount directed to be paid under this section may be recovered—

¶39

(a) if the Authority is a Magistrate, by the Authority as if it were a fine imposed by the Authority as a Magistrate, or

¶40

(b) if the Authority is not a Magistrate, by any Magistrate to whom the Authority makes application in this behalf, as if it were a fine imposed by such Magistrate .”

¶41

(emphasis supplied)

¶42

1. The above provision makes it clear that any amount directed to be paid under section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act is recoverable as a „fine‟ imposed by a Magistrate.

¶43

In the present case, the record shows that the authority under the Minimum Wages Act has filed the requisite application before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (now Judicial Magistrate First Class under the BNSS); and there is therefore no reason why the learned Magistrate should not proceed to recover the amount, especially since there is no stay operating against such recovery in view of para 11 of order dated 06.02.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No. 1512/2023.

¶44

In view of the limited prayer made, it is not considered necessary to require a written response in the present case.

¶45

As a result, the present petition is disposed-of, with a direction to the learned Magistrate to proceed with the application pending before that court as expeditiously as feasible, in accordance with law.

¶46

Needless to add that any fresh application seeking stay of recovery of the amount awarded under the Minimum Wages Act would be considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the civil writ proceedings independent of the observations contained in this order; and any order

¶47

CRL.M.C. 145/2025

¶48

Page 4 of 5

¶49

This is a digitally signed order.

¶50

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 15:44:35

¶51

passed in those proceedings would be brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate.

¶52