SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(AP) 132

A.GANGADHARA RAO
ASSISTANT INSPECTOR OF LABOUR, KURNOOL-II, INSPECTOR UNDER MINIMUM WAGES ACT, REPRESEENTED BY THE Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , Hyd – Appellant
Versus
K. V. SUBBAIAH SETTY – Respondent


A. GANGADHARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE question for consideration in these two appeals is whether the minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950, or the Andhra Pradesh Minimum wages Rules, 1960 that are applicable to the shops of the respondent ?

( 2 ) IT is sufficient if I state the facts in Crl. Appeal No. 146 1980. The assistant Inspector of Labour, Kurnool, II Circle and Inspector under the minimum Wages Act, inspected the shop of the respondent at kurnool on 30th January, 1979 at 6-55 p. m. The respondent, the owner of the shop was present. The officer demanded the production of the wage slips of the employees for the period September, 1978 to December, 1978. The resspondent produced wage slips iasued upto August, 1978. Then the Assisstant Inspector of Labour prepared the inspection report, Ex. P-1 on the spot and obtained the signature of the employer on it and also noted the remarks in the vistor s book maintained under the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Act. He issued Inspection order cum-show cause notice dated 31st January, 1979, which was racsivsd by the respondent on 17th February, 1979. Since there was no reply, a complaint was filed against the respondent on 24th April, 1979











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top