SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
10th October 1962.
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K.N. WANCHOO, K.C. DAS GUPTA AND J.C. SHAH, JJ.
M/s Bhikusa Yamasa Kshatriya and another, Appellants
Versus
Sangamner Akola Taluka Bidi Kamgar Union and others. Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 546 of 1961.
Advocates appeared
Mr. G. S. Pathak, Senior Advocate (M/s J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, Advocates of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co. with him), for Appellants; M/s. D. S. Nargolkar and K. R. Chaudhuri, Advocates, for Respondent No. 1; M/s. S. B. Naik and K. R. Chaudhuri, Advocates, for Respondent No. 2; Mr. N. S. Bindra, Senior Advocate (Mr. P. D. Menon, Advocate, with him), for Respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
Judgment
SHAH, J.: M/s. Bhikusa Yamsa Kshatriya and M/s. Bastiram Narayandas (owner of bidi factories at Sangamner in the District of Ahmednagar) hereinafter referred to collectively as the appellants , moved the High Court of Judicature at Bombay under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ or direction declaring S. 3 (3) (iv) of the Minimum Wages Act, Xl of 1948 and a Notification dated April 19, 1955 issued by the Government of Bombay in exercise of the authority vested under the Act "ultra vires, void and illegal" because the said enactment and the Notification infringed the guarantee of equal protection of the laws, and affected the rights of the appellants to carry on their lawful business, and for an order declaring that the appellants were not bound by the said Notification and were not liable to pay wages to the Bidi workers at the rates prescribed by the Notification, and for consequential relief.
The High Court dismissed the petition, for in their view S. 3(3) (iv) of the Minimum Wages Act and Notification dated April 19, 1955 fixing minimum rates of wages for bidi workers in the localities of Sangamner and Akola did not violate the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution and that the State of Bombay had "in issuing the Notification revising the rates of minimum wages followed the procedure prescribed in that behalf by the Act. "Against the order, with certificate of fitness granted by the High Court under Art. 133, (1) (c) of the Constitution, this appeal is preferred by the appellants.
2. The Minimum Wages Act,1948 was enacted by the Parliament to provide for fixing minimum rates of wages in certain employments. The validity of the Act as it stood in the year 1956 falls to be determined in this appeal. We will therefore refer to the Act as it stood in the year 1956, and will omit reference to amendments in the Act by enactments since that year. Sub-section (1) of S. 3 authorises the appropriate Government in the manner prescribed to fix minimum wages payable to employees employed in employments specified in Parts I and II of the Schedule, for the whole State or for a part of the State or for any specified class or classes of such employment in the whole State or parts thereof and to review at such intervals as the State thinks fit the minimum rates of wages so fixed and to revise the rates. By sub-s. (3) the State is authorised in fixing or revising minimum rates of wages to fix - (a) different minimum rates of wages for (i) different scheduled employments; (ii) different classes of work in the same scheduled employment; (iii) adults, adolescents, children and apprentices; (iv) different localities. Section 5 sub-sec. (1) prescribes the procedure for fixing and revising the rates of minimum wages. It is provided in so far as it is material that "in fixing minimum rates of wages in respect of any scheduled employment x x x or in revising minimum rates of wages the appropriate Government shall either -(a) appoint as many committees and sub-committees as it considers necessary to hold enquiries and advise it in respect of such fixation or revision, as the case may be, or (b) by notification in the official Gazette, publish its proposals for the information of persons likely to be affected thereby and specify, a date, x xxxx on which the proposals will be taken into consideration. " By sub-s. (2) the appropriate Government is authorised to fix the minimum rates of wages in respect of each scheduled employment after considering the advice of the committee or sub-committee or the representation received from persons interested. Section 6 empowers the appropriate Government to appoint Advisory Committees and sub-committees to enquire into the conditions prevailing in any scheduled employment and to advise the appropriate Government in making such revision in respect of such employment. Section 7 authorises the appropriate Government to appoint Advisory Boards for the purpose of co-ordinating the work of
referred to : U. Unichoyi v. State of Kerala
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.