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

1967 Supreme(Raj) 31

Rajasthan High Court
Modi (Actg.), C.J. & Kan Singh, J.
Hari Ram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
Civil Writ No.406 of 1966
Decided On : January 25, 1967

Advocates Appeared:
Hastimal Parakh, for Petitioners; M.M. Vyas G.A., for Respondents

Headnote:(a) Minimum Wages Act, Sec. 9—independent Persons — Expression does not include Government Servants, where the Government is employer in any of the scheduled employ-ment (Per Modi Actg. C.J.)(b) Minimum Wages Act, Sec. 9—Independent Persons—Expression does not necessarily exclude Government employees altogether—Government employees who cannot be held biased may be appointed (Per Kan Singh J.)(c)—Minimum Wages Act, Sec. 9—Advisory —Fundamental defect or illegality in Government notifications.

       

MODI (Actg), C.J.—This is a group of 16 writ applications challenging the validity of Notification No. F. (12) Lab./63, dated the 31st July, 1965 (Ex. 3) published in the Rajasthan Gazette Extraordinary dated the 31st July, 1965, having been issued by the Rajasthan State under the Minimum Wages Act (No. 11) of 1948, hereinafter called the Act, purporting to revise the minimum rates of wages for employees employed in the Mica Mines throughout the State of Rajasthan in accordance with the schedule given thereunder. This notification, as stated therein, was made under sec. 3 read with sub-sec. (2) of sec. 5 of the Act by the respondent State in pursuance of notification No.LWI(1) 2(20) 58, dated the 27th June, 1960 of the Ministry of Labour and Employment of the Government of India by which the President of India acting under Art. 258(1) of the Constitution had delegated to the State Government functions of the Central Government to review and revise the minimum rates of wages for employees employed in mica mines situated in this State. The several petitioners in these writ petitions are employers engaged in the business of mica mining, that is, the manufacture and sale thereof in the various mines situated in this State.

2. The material facts leading up to these writ applications may shortly be stated as follows. To start with, the respondent State had fixed minimum wages for workmen employed in mica mines throughout Rajasthan by a notification dated the 29th March, 1952. This notification came to be challenged before this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 58 of 1955 (N.K. Jain vs. The Labour Commissioner, Rajasthan), and by its decision dated the 27th August, 1956, which is reported as ILR (1957) VII Rajasthan 74, that notification was held to be invalid inasmuch as the committee which was appointed by the State under sec. 5(1) of the Act to advise it in the matter of the fixation of the rates in question had not been lawfully composed in accordance with certain essential requirements of sec. 9 of the Act, and consequently the notification of 1952 was struck down. I shall have occasion to refer to this case at some length hereafter.

3. Thereafter, by another notification, dated the 24th April,f 1959, the State again fixed the minimum rate of wages for workmen employed in mica mines in this State (See Ex. 1). In the Schedule given under this notification, only one category of worker was specified, namely, an "adult worker", and his minimum wages were fixed at Rs. 1/5/- per day exclusive of weekly days of rest. Then again, by a further notification dated the 31st July, 1965 (Ex, 3) which is now impugned before us, the State Government revised the rates for the class of workmen with which we are concerned throughout the State of Rajasthan under 26 different categories as specified in the Schedule given in the said notification.

4. As a preliminary step to this last-mentioned notification, the State Govt. had on the 17th May, 1962, in the first instance appointed a Committee consisting I of five members, (and it is entirely unnecessary to say anything about its composition as it came to be changed before it started working) to inquire into the conditions prevailing in the employment in mica mines and to advise the State Government in the matter of revision of the rates of wages fixed by the last-mentioned notification dated the 24th April, 1959. This notification was, however, superseded by another notification dated the 26th November, 1952, by which although the total membership was maintained as before, its personnel was almost wholly changed except with respect to one of its members who happened to be a representative of the employers, and it was ordered to consist of two representatives of the employers as well as two of the employees, and Professor K. S. Mathur, Head of Department of Economics Degree Classes, Government College, Ajmer, was appointed an independent member and its chairman and a serious dispute has been raised befor















































































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