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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, J.
Dy. General Manager State Bank - Appellant
Versus
Vijay Singh - Respondent
W.P.(C) 2664 of 2007 & CM Appl. Nos. 15372 of 2013, 16844 of 2019 and 33092 of 2020
Decided On : 18-02-2021




The employer is required to pay revised minimum wages during litigation under the Industrial Disputes Act, ensuring financial justice for the workman.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 17B - Payment of wages - The petitioner-bank was directed to recalculate and pay arrears of Rs.3,62,268/- for the period from 01.10.2011 to 30.11.2020 at revised minimum wage rates as applicable. Claims made by the respondent-workman for unpaid wages were substantiated, as earlier orders from the court established his entitlement to the higher of minimum wages or last drawn wages. (Paras 2, 8, 9)

(B) The court affirmed that the employer is obligated to pay minimum wages as per the latest revisions and the reasoning included the challenges faced by the respondent-workman due to prolonged non-employment. The Court also emphasized that financial difficulties necessitate timely wage payments. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The respondent-workman filed applications under Section 17B claiming unpaid wages following prior court orders ensuring payment at least at minimum wage rates. The petitioner-bank had made partial payments based on outdated wage rates.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that all relevant wage adjustments according to government revisions must be adhered to, resulting in a recalculation of owed wages.

Issues: The central issue was whether the petitioner was required to pay wages at the revised minimum rates as per earlier orders.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that minimum wages must be clarified and paid appropriately to the worker, stressed by the years since termination and the financial turmoil faced by the worker.

Result: Application disposed of directing recalculation of payments.

Table of Content
1. claim for unpaid wages and calculations of minimum wage. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments against revised wage payment by petitioner. (Para 6)
3. court's analysis on wage payments and employer obligations. (Para 8)
4. court's order to recalculate and pay wage deficits. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT

[Physical court hearing]

Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)

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. That in pursuance of the order dt. 18.02.2020 (Annexure-X) the petitioner/management made further payment to the Bank account of the respondent as follows:

(i) 06.03.2020Rs.2,00,000/-
(ii) 06.03.2020Rs.1,00,000/-
(iii) 07.03.2020Rs.71.300/-
TotalRs.3,71,300/-

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:

"PeriodRate of Minimum wages Per MonthDue Amount for 6 Months
01.10.11 to 31.03.12Rs.4303.00Rs.25818.00
01.04.12 to 30.09.12Rs.4528.00Rs.27168.00
01.10.12 to 31.03.13Rs.4677.00Rs.28062.00
01.04.13 to 30.09.13Rs.4976.00Rs.29856.00
01.10.13 to 31.03.14Rs.5200.00Rs.31200.00
01.04.14 to 30.09.14Rs.6362.00Rs.38172.00
01.10.14 to 31.03.15Rs.6416.00Rs.38496.00
01.04.15 to 30.09.15Rs.6735.00Rs.40410.00
01.10.15 to 31.03.16Rs.6815.00Rs.40890.00
01.04.16 to 30.09.16Rs.7108.00Rs.42648.00
01.10.16 to 31.03.17Rs.7214.00Rs.43284.00
01.04.17 to 30.09.17Rs.7400.00Rs.44400.00
01.10.17 to 31.03.18Rs.7401.00Rs.44406.00
01.04.18 to 30.09.18Rs.7614.00Rs.45684.00
01.10.18 to 31.03.19Rs.7676.00Rs.46056.00
01.04.19 to 30.09.19Rs.8013.00Rs.48078.00
01.10.19 to 3

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 Back to top