JUDGMENT - Chagla, C.J.

[1] These two petitions challenge certain orders passed by the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, and the facts which I am about to state do cot redound very much to the credit of the railway authorities who are the employers.

[2] Respondent 2, who is the employee, was detained under the Preventive Detention Act on 19-2-1949, and the railway authorities passed an order on 23-2-1919, suspending respondent 2 from service. On 1.6.1949, respondents was released from detention, and the period of suspension ended on l5-1-1950. Under certain rules, the employee was compelled to go on leave from 16-1-1950 to 11.6.1950, on full pay, from 12.6.1950, to 7-10-1950, on half pay, and from 8-10-1950 without any pay at all. Even to day this employee is on compulsory leave and no pay is being given to him. He has not been charged with having committed any act which is contrary to the rules of service, and no result of any departmental enquiry if a departmental enquiry has indeed been held has been communicated to him. The employee went before the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act claiming that ho was entitled to his full wages throughout the period as he was in t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document