Minimum Wages Act, 1948 – Claim petitions filed by two persons (applicants) against the appellant under the 1948 Act – Grievance of applicants was that they worked with appellant on her land for about 2 years but she did not pay them their legitimate wages – Competent authority allowed the claim petitions and imposed penalty also on the appellant – Appellate authority upheld the order of competent authority – High Court dismissed the writ petitions – On appeal, held: No case for interference made out – Question as to whether the two workers ever worked with the appellant and, if so, for how much period and how much wages were payable to them by their employer were the material questions, which were gone into by the competent authority and appellate authority and decided in favour of the two workers – A concurrent finding of fact recorded on these issues was binding on the High Court while deciding the writ petitions and the intra Court appeals – Writ Court rightly dismissed the writ petitions inter alia on the ground of non-impleadment of the two workers in whose favour the orders were passed by the authorities under the Act as they were necessary parties in the writ petitions – Impleadment application filed by appellant in the intra Court appeals after a long lapse of time was rightly dismissed on the ground of delay and laches – Moreover, in the meantime, both the workers also expired and their legal representatives were not made parties either in the intra Court appeals or in these appeals – This ground was, therefore, enough for dismissal of the writ petitions, intra Court appeals and these appeals – Appellant was afforded a sufficient opportunity to defend and which she also availed of – That apart, no case of prejudice was made out by the appellant at any stage of the proceedings – Having regard to the nature of breaches committed by the appellant and which were held proved, the authority was justified in imposing the penalty on her – Authority has the power under the Act to impose the penalty, once the breaches alleged against the employer are proved – The appellate authority, the writ Court and the Division Bench in their respective jurisdiction rightly did not interfere on any of these issues – Appellant is directed to calculate the amount payable to the two workers and pay to their legal representatives – Necessary party – Delay/laches – Labour laws.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: What is involved in this case is a pure question of fact which cannot be gone into in these appeals. A concurrent finding of fact recorded on these issues by the two authorities was binding on the High Court while deciding the writ petitions and the intra Court appeals. The claim in question relates to the year 1991 and pertains to the payment of minimum wages payable to two workers, who are now dead and not represented before this Court. However, the appellant has not been able to make out any case on merits. The only grievance of the appellant before the High Court was that she was not afforded an adequate opportunity in the proceedings and secondly penalty imposed by the authorities on her was excessive in quantum and hence either it should be set aside or reduced to some extent. There is no merit in these submissions. The appellant was afforded a sufficient opportunity to defend and which she also availed of. That apart, no material was produced by the appellant at any stage of the proceedings to show that any prejudice was caused to her. Having regard to the nature of breaches committed by the appellant and which were held proved, the authority was justified in imposing the penalty on the appellant. The authority has the power under the Act to impose the penalty, once the breaches alleged against the employer are proved. The appellant is directed to calculate the entire amount payable to the two workers (since dead) in terms of the impugned orders and the same be paid to the legal representatives of the two workers within three months from the date of this order. [Paras 12, 17 and 19][71-E, F; 72-B-E, G]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.