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

2004 Supreme(Jhk) 967

H.S.PRASAD
SUDHA JHINGON – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF JHARKHAND – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.SRIVASTAVA, RUPESH RAJAN

Judgment :

H. S. PRASAD, J.

( 1 ) THIS application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 31-7-2002 passed in C/2

( 2 ) THE prosecution case in brief is that complainant-Labour Superintendent-cum-Inspector under Minimum Wages Act, 1948, chaibasa after taking sanction under Section 22 (b) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 filed a Complaint before the learned Chief judicial Magistrate, Seraikella alleging therein that when he and his associates went on 5-7-2001 to the firm named as M/s. Gangotri Nursing Home and Research Centre for inspection, he met one Abhijit dasgupta, receptionist of the firm and in course of inspection, he found that the petitioners firm has committed several irregularities and violated provisions of minimum Wages Act and Rules framed thereunder. Definitions are : (A) The employee had been given less wages than fixed by the Government under minimum Wages Act, 1948. (B) Wages Register had not been kept in form-X and on demand for inspection, register was not produced. (C) The Muster Roll had not been kept in form-V and on demand for inspection, it was no







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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top