“Treating the appeals, therefore, as revisional applications, the question is whether the Magistrate had jurisdiction to entertain the applications for the payment of compensation alone. Under s. 15 (2) where contrary to the provisions of the Act, any payment of wages had been delayed, the Inspector might apply to the authority constituted under the Act for a direction under sub-s. (3). That sub- section provides that when an application under sub-s. (2) is entertained, the authority shall hear the applicant and the employer, and, after such further inquiry as may be necessary, may direct the payment of the delayed wages, together with the payment of such compensation as the authority may think fit, not exceeding ten rupees. In my opinion, this sub-section means that the order for compensation could be passed along with the order for the payment of delayed wages; but where there could not be any order for the payment of delayed wages if they were paid before the application was made, I do not think it is open to the applicant to apply for a direction for the payment of compensation alone. Forma Nos. A, B and C in Appendix I to the Act also provide for an order of compensation to be made along with the order for the payment of delayed wages. As I read sub-ss. (2) and (3) of s. 15, the legislature has not contemplated the case of an application for compensation alone. The application must be for the payment of delayed wages, and it is only in such an application that the authority might pass an order for compensation along with the order for the payment of delayed wages. I can only say that if it was the intention of the legislature that an application for compensation alone could be preferred after the payment of delayed wages, it has not used appropriate words in the section. The only construction that I can put on the section is that an order for compensation could be made along with the order for the wages but not by itself and that therefore an application for compensation alone is not
