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

2007 Supreme(P&H) 221

HEMANT GUPTA
Sat Narain – Appellant
Versus
General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Rohtak Depot – Respondent


Judgment

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

1. The challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated June 30, 1988 passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages act, 1936 and the order in appeal dated January 18, 1989 against the aforesaid order.

2. The petitioner has filed a petition under sec. 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), claiming a sum of Rs.209/- on account of wages for the period April 1, 1985 to February 28,1986 and bonus for the year 1985-1986.

3. It was found by the learned Authority that two increments of the petitioner was stopped y the order of the disciplinary Authority i. e. General Manager, after a charge sheet was served upon the petitioner and the reply received. Therefore, it was found that deductions are not illegal. The said order,was affirmed in appeal as well.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the petition under Sec.15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 itself was not maintainable. It has been so held by this Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Dildar Singh, 2007 (1) Service Cases Today 202 and General Manager, Punjab Roadways, ropar V/s. Swaran Singh 2001 (3) RSJ 41

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