Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : ANANTA NARAYANA AYYAR
PENTALA KOTAIAH - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 11-04-65
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT - SECTION 2 (VI) (D) - SECTION 15 (3) - SECTION 15 (5) (B) - RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION - WHETHER RECOVERABLE UNDER SECTION 15 (5) (B) - HELD, YES.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employer, challenged the order of the Magistrate directing him to deposit retrenchment compensation awarded to his ex-employee under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, contending that such compensation was not recoverable under Section 15 (5) (b) of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that retrenchment compensation awarded under Section 25 (F) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, falls within the definition of \"wages\" under Section 2 (vi) (d) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, and is therefore recoverable under Section 15 (5) (b) of the Act.
Issues: Whether retrenchment compensation awarded under Section 25 (F) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is recoverable under Section 15 (5) (b) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that Section 2 (vi) (d) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, defines \"wages\" to include any sum payable under any law by reason of the termination of employment, and that Section 25 (F) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provides for the payment of retrenchment compensation at the time of retrenchment. Therefore, the court concluded that retrenchment compensation is an amount which can be recovered under Section 15 (5) (b) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, upholding the Magistrate's order directing the petitioner to deposit the retrenchment compensation.
( 1 ) THE Petitioner, Pcntala Kotayya, has filed this petition praying for quashing the proceedings in the court of the learned VIth City Magistrate in crl. M. P. No. 182 of 1965 on his file. The relevant facts are as follows.
( 2 ) AN Authority duly empowered to act under the Paymet of Wages Act, passed an order on 26-10-1963 in file No. 2437/63 (Case No. 29/63) directing that the respondent, Pentala Kotayya, should pay an amount of Rs. 1,125/-as retrenchment compensation to the petitioner, Boggavarapu Ammayya (an ex-employee of the petitioner herein) who was employed in a tobacco shop of which the petitioner, pentala Kotayya was the owner. At the instance of the said Authority, the learned VI th City Magistrate registered Crl M. P. No. 182 of 1965 and issued a notice to the petitioner, Pentala Kotayya, directing him to deposit the sum of Rs. 1,125/- on or before 13-8-1965, Obviously, the learned Magistrate was proceeding under Section 15 (5) (b) of the Payment of Wages Act (Central act IV of 1936 ). The Petitioner, Pentala Kotayya, appeared by an advocate before the learned Magistrate and filed a petition contending that the amount sought to be recovered from him was not an amount which could be collected under sec. 15 (5) (b) of the Act and that only wages could be collected by resort to that provision, On behalf of the petitioner, it was contended before the learned Magistrate that the matter involved a question of jurisdiction and that it should be decided either by the learned Magistrate himself or that a Reference might be made to the High Court. The learned magistrate issued a warrant on the same day for attachment of the moveables in the residence of the said Pentala Kotayya. Thereupon the petitioner herein filed the present petition in this Court under Sec. 561-A. Cr. P. C.
( 3 ) THE correctness of the order passed by the Authority dated 26-10-1963 is not challenged before me. No appeal was filed against that order as provided for in the Act. The only contention raised before me is that the amount concerned is not an amount which can be recovered under section 15 (5) (b) of the act. The order of the Authority shows that the amount is awarded as retrenchment compensation. It is not contended before me that the amount is not due as retrenchment compensation. I proceed on the basis that the amount of retrenchment compensation has been awarded by the Authority and can be lawfully collected from the petitioner. Section 15 of the Act runs as follows:- 1. The State Government may. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . appoint any commissioner for Workmens Compensation or other officer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to be the Authority to hear and decide for any specified area all claims arising out of. . . . . . delay in payment of the wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Where contrary to the provisions of this Act. . . . . . any payment of wages has been delayed, such person. . . . . . . . . may apply to such Authority for a direction under Sub Section (3): When any application under sub section (2) is entertained, the Authority shall. . . and, after such further inquiry, (if any) as may be necessary, may. . . . . . direct. . . . . . the payment of the delayed wages. 5 (a) Any amount directed to be paid under this section may be recovered. . . . . . (b) if the authority is not a Magistrate, by any Magistrate to whom the authority makes application in this behalf, as if it were a fine imposed by such Magistrate. " section 2 runs as follows :-"in this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context:- (vi) wages means all remuneration. . . . . . expressed in terms of money or capable of being so expressed which would, if the terms of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a person employed. . . . . . . . . and includes. . . (d) any sum which by reason of the termination of employment of the person employed is payabl
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.