Sub-section (5-A) of Sec.20 of the Minimum Wages Act confers equal powers on the appellate authority to direct the employer to deposit atleast 50% of the amount awarded by the original authority, excluding the amount of compensation before the appeal might be taken up for hearing.

Aftab Alam, J.

1. The question that arises for consideration in this case is whether the provision of Sub-section (5-A) introduced in Sec.20 of the Minimum Wages Act by a State amendment would also apply at the stage of appeal or the application of the provision is confined to the proceedings only at the original stage.

2. The Labour Enforcement Officer filed a claim on behalf of 64 workmen before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Dalmia-nagar, Rohtas under Sec.20 of the Minimum Wages Act against the petitioner-company in its capacity as the principal employer. The claim was registered as Case No. MW 66/1996. The Assistant Labour Commissioner by order, dated March 31, 1997 allowed the claim holding the 64 concerned workmen entitled to receive different amounts (totalling to a sum of Rs.3,11,053.46) as foe difference between the wages payable and the wages actually paid to them. He accordingly directed the petitioners to make payment of the respective amounts to each of the concerned workmen within thirty days from the date of the order.

3. The petitioner preferred an appeal against this order which is registered as Case No. MWA 1/1997 before the Deputy Labour Commissioner and the appellate authority under the Act. In that appeal the appellate authority by order, dated August 20, 1997 directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,56,526.73, being 50% of the amount awarded by the original authority by a specified date making it a condition precedent for taking up the appeal for hearing on merits. It is this order which is sought to be challenged by the petitioners by filing this writ petition before this Court.

4. Mr. Shivajee Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioners assailed the order as completely unauthorised. Learned Counsel submitted that the provisions of Sec.20 of the Act did not sanction a direction for depositing the amount awarded by the original authority either in full or in part being made a condition precedent for the hearing of the appeal on merits. According to him, Sub-section (5-A) of Sec.20 of the Act does not give any such power to the appellate authority and the reliance placed by the appellate authority on the provision of that sub-section was quite misconceived.

5. Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act deals with the claims arising out of payment of less than the minimum rates of wages. This section consists of a number of sub-sections. It underwent amendments in this State on two occasions. By Bihar Act 5 of 1983 a provision was made for an appeal against the order passed by the original authority by substituting Sub-section (6) of the Central Act. Sub-section (6) of the Central Act made the direction of the authority as final. The Bihar amendment substituted in its place a provision allowing for an appeal against the order passed by the original authority. Later, by Bihar Act 9 of 1988 a new provision was introduced as Sub-section (5-A) which is as follows:-

"at the time of hearing, the Authority may direct the employer to deposit atleast 50% of the claimed amount with the Authority excluding the amount of compensation. The said amount may be paid to the claimant which shall be adjusted subsequently with the decreed amount. "

6. The appellate authority has directed the petitioners to deposit 50% of the amount awarded by the original authority relying upon the provision of Sub-section (5-A) of Sec.20.

7. Mr. Shivajee Pandey, however, contended that from the language of Sub-section (5-A) and its position in seriatim [that is, being placed before the provision of appeal in Sub-section (6)] it was clear that Sub-section (5-A) conferred power to ask for deposit from the employer only on the original authority and not on the appellate authority.

8. I am unable to accept the submission and examining the matter from different points of view I feel that Sub-section (5-A) must be held to confer equal powers on the appellate authority.

9. It is well established that an appeal is a continuation of the p