Nagar Palika Kaman challenged a Minimum Wages Act order requiring extra payments to claimants. The Court found the order unsullied by factual errors as payments were made directly and remained deficient even with deductions accounted for, dismissing the writ.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1243/2021
Nagar Palika Kaman, Through Its Executive Officer Nagar Palika Kaman, District Bharatpur
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Kishore Sharma For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
19/02/2021
The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the order passed by the Authority under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 dated 8th January, 2020.
Learned counsel submits that the claimants were appointed through the ex-servicemen Kalyan Sahakari Samiti and the payment was being made to the applicants through Kalyan Samiti. The petitioner cannot be said to be principal employer and the payment of claim put by the applicants without impleading concerned Samiti could not have been entertained, the directions
(2 of 3)
[CW-1243/2021]
issued by the authority to make the payment of the additional amount is unjustified.
I have considered the submissions.
The applicant-respondents had moved an application before the Authority under the Minimum of Wages Act, 1948 mentioning that for the month of March to April, 2012, the amount paid was only Rs.6650/-, whereas monthly minimum wages came to Rs.4030/-. Similarly, monthly wages for May to December, 2012 came to Rs.4342/-, whereas total amount paid from May to December, 2012 was Rs.26600/- and similarly from January to March, 2013 while the minimum wages were Rs.4836/- per month. The amount paid from January to March, 2013 was only Rs.9975/-, for 15 days of April, 2013. The total amount paid was Rs.1663/-, whereas as per the minimum wages the amount came to Rs.2418/-. Thus, the applicants claimed a sum of Rs.14834/along with interest from the respondents therein. The petitioner who was respondent No.2 before the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, pleaded of not being the appointing authority for the applicants but did not deny the fact that the applicants worked with them, although it was stated that the salary was paid through the Society. During the course of hearing, it has come on record that direct payment was being paid to the concerned applicants and 5% of the commission was being paid to the concerned Society.
The Authority has examined the said aspects and also considered Section 21 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 and reached to the conclusion that the payments were being made directly to the concerned applicants
(3 of 3) [CW-1243/2021]
by the petitioners and the amount which has been paid is less than the minimum wages. On pointing the query, this Court has also found that even if the 5% amount is added to the amount actually paid to the concerned applicants, the said amount would not be equal to the minimum wages which the applicants would have received. Thus, the order passed by the concerned Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 cannot be said to be having any factual error or perverse in any manner. No interference is therefore is warranted.
The writ petition is found to be devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
NITIN /60
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the additional wages order passed against the local body is justified considering the workers were appointed through a Society though paid directly.
Whether the authority's finding regarding the quantum of wages being less than the minimum wages was perverse or lacks factual error.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nagar Palika Kaman, Through Its Executive Officer
Puran Lal
Sher Singh
Brijesh Kumar Pathak
Director Local Bodies, Jaipur
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
