The main legal point established in the judgment is that the employer is obligated to pay the minimum wages at the revised rate, as it would partially reduce the impact of the increase in the cost of living, and the court has the power to direct payment de hors the provisions of Section 17B of the I.D. Act if the situation mandates issuance of such a direction.

JUDGMENT

Rajiv Shakdher, J. - CM APPL. No.33092/2020

1. The prayer made in the application is as follows:

"It is therefore prayed that the petitioner management may be directed to release the difference of arrears amounting to Rs.3,62,268/- for the period 01.10.2011 to 30.10.2020 as calculated in para 5 above and continue to pay the further wages month by month as per minimum wage revised from time to time."

2. This is an application filed on behalf of the respondent-workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [hereafter referred to as the "I.D. Act"] pursuant to the order dated 2.2.2011.

3. To be noted, via the order dated 2.2.2011, this Court had disposed of the respondent-workman's earlier application, whereby the petitioner-bank was directed to pay to the respondent-workman last drawn wages or minimum wages; whichever was higher.

4. According to the respondent-workman, the petitioner-bank has paid Rs.1,47,350/- towards arrears of wages for the period spanning between 1.8.2008 and September 2011, albeit, at the rate of Rs.3,900/- per month.

4.1 The respondent-workman avers that since further payments were not made, after the payment of the arrears of wages in pursuance of the aforementioned order i.e. order dated 02.02.2011, he moved another application [i.e. CM No.16844/2019], in which, order dated 18.2.2020 was passed.

4.2 It is the case of the respondent-workman that via the order dated 18.2.2020, this Court directed payment of arrears of wages, albeit, at the revised rate. The respondent-workman avers that pursuant to the order dated 18.2.2020, the petitioner-bank paid further amounts without taking into account the revised rate stipulated qua the minimum wages. The assertion with regard to the amounts paid by the petitioner-bank based on pre-revised minimum wages rates is set forth in paragraph 4 of the captioned application. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereafter:

4.3 Thus, as per the respondent-workman, the amounts paid, after the order dated 18.2.2020 was passed, totalled up to Rs.3,71,300/-. These amounts, it is averred, have been paid for the period spanning between 1.10.2011 and 30.9.2020.

4.4 Therefore, in effect, the respondent-workman is aggrieved, as the petitioner-bank has not applied the revised minimum wages rate as notified by the Government of Uttar Pradesh qua the unskilled workmen from time to time.

4.5 The difference arising on this score and the amount claimed on this account by the respondent-workman is set out in a tabular form in paragraph 5 of the captioned application. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereafter: