A common order dismissing writ petitions challenging orders passed by the 1st Respondent-Authority granting minimum wage claims under Section 22-F of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
All writ petitions were dismissed, confirming the orders of the 1st Respondent-Authority in favour of the workmen.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION Nos.20588, 21033, 21035 & 21137 of 2003
COMMON ORDER:
All these writ petitions are being disposed of by way of this common order, as the issue raised in these writ petitions is one and the same. For the purpose of convenience, the facts as narrated in W.P.No.20588 of 2003 are discussed hereunder.
of Wages Act that they are not being paid minimum wages and the said Authority, though there is no jurisdiction, had allowed the claim made by the workmen in P.W. Case No.16 of 2002, dated 25.02.2003. The Standing Counsel has contended that all the workmen were drawing minimum wages of Rs.1,950/- per month, and at that relevant point of time, the 1st respondent had jurisdiction to entertain the cases in respect of such of those employees whose wages are less than Rs.1,600/-
AKS, J W.P.Nos.20588 of 2003 & batch
2
per month. Since the workmen are claiming wages more than Rs.1,600/per month, the 1st respondent lacks jurisdiction to entertain their cases, but the 1st respondent, without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioner-Corporation, has mechanically allowed the cases filed by the workmen. Therefore, the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent are liable to be set aside.
AKS, J W.P.Nos.20588 of 2003 & batch
3
orders passed by the 1st respondent in favour of the workmen. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
9 th January, 2020
ajr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petitions seeking quashing of orders passed by the Authority under Section 22-F of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 are maintainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner-Corporation
Workmen
1st Respondent-Authority
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
