Rajesh Kumar v. Hrtc and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
A single judge listed the petitioner's claim that a disbursed sum of Rs.2,02,965/- violates Section 26 of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961, and asked respondents for further instructions before finalizing the case.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Rajesh Kumar vs. HRTC & Ors.
CWP No. 9370 of 2023.
01.04.2024 Present: Mr. S.P. Chatterji, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Shrutika Chuhan, Advocate, vice counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel for the respondents has
placed on record a copy of communication, according to which a sum of Rs.2,02,965/- has been disbursed to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the payment made to the petitioner is not in conformity with the provisions of Section 26 of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 and as per the said provision, petitioner was entitled to the amount at double the rates than the amount payable to him of wages at ordinary rates.
Confronted with this, learned counsel for the respondents seeks time to have further instructions.
List on 13th May, 2024.
(Satyen Vaidya) Judge
1st April, 2024. (Jai)
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the admissible sum of Rs.2,02,965/- disbursed to the petitioner conforms to Section 26 of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to double wages under Section 26 of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 over ordinary wages.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rajesh Kumar
- respondent
HRTC & Ors.
Coram
Satyen Vaidya
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Himachal Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- CWP/9370/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court