Non-payment of wages by an employer to an employee, when the entitlement of the employee is denied, is a deduction and not delayed payment, and the employer is liable to pay compensation under Section 15(3) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1972.

( 1 ) THE Services of the petitioner, who was appointed as Driver (Road Roller) on November, 1, 1978 in the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh, was terminated by an order dated february 18, 1980. The Petitioner filed claim petition before U. P. Public Services Tribunal, lucknow. The said claim petition was allowed, directing reinstatement of the petitioner without back wages. Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 3420 of 1982 moved by the petitioner was allowed on October 9, 1991, holding that the petitioner was entitled to back wages subject to his gainful employment elsewhere. Since no payment was made the petitioner made an application under Section 15 of Payment of Wages Act before the Payment of Wages Authority. The said case was registered as case PW-18/92. By an order dated May 11, 1992 the said claim was allowed and the employer was directed to pay compensation ten times the wages payable.

( 2 ) AN appeal against the aforesaid Order dated May 11, 1992 being Miscellaneous Civil Appeal no. 78 of 1992 was preferred before the District Judge, Jhansi. The said appeal was allowed partly by an order dated May 13, 1994 passed by the learned District Judge, Jhansi being the appellate Authority Under Payment of Wages Act, setting aside the Payment of penalty and compensation upholding the payment of salary. It is against this order the present writ petition has been moved.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Bhushan contends that the payment for the said period amounts to deduction for which ten times penally is prescribed. In the facts and circumstances of the case the non-payment or withholding of payment of salary by the employer to the employee cannot be termed as delayed payment but is deduction and it has been 50 held in the case of Delta Forging Works v. Manik Karmakar 1977 LIC 207, Divisional Personnel officer, Northern Railway, Allahabad v. Ambika Prasad and Ors. 1988 (57) FLR 113 (All.), union of India v. Kameshwar Dubey and Ors. (1988-II-LLJ-302) (Del.) and Raj Ku-mar manohar Lal v. Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway Baroda House, new Delhi and Anr. AIR 1969 All 472.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondents employer on the other hand contends that the order passed by the learned District Judge, Jhansi is correct. In the facts and circumstances of the case payment can never be termed as deduction, it was delayed payment as has been held by the learned District Judge and, therefore, no compensation is payable.

( 5 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions it is necessary to refer to different provisions of payment of Wages Act, 1972. Section 3 casts upon the employer the responsibility for payment of persons employed by him of all the wages required to be paid under the Payment of Wages act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ). Section 5 prescribes time for payment of wages as before the expiry of 7th day when employed in Railway, Factory or other establishment, in which thousand persons are employed and before expiry of tenth day, if employed in any other factory or establishment, after the last date of the last wage period in respect of which wages are payable. Section 6 provides that all wages are to be paid in current coin or currency notes or in both except the employee has authorisation to pay him the wages by cheque or by crediting his wages in his bank account. Section 7 prohibits deductions of any amount from the wages except those authorised by or under the said Act namely the deductions specified in the said section. Sections 10, 11, 12, 12-A and 13 of the Act provide various kinds of deduction sor recovery permissible un- der the said Act, Section 15 provides the machineries for recovering such deductions made from wages or delayed payment of wages and penalty for malicious or vexatious claims while Section 17 of the Act prescribes for an appeal.

( 6 ) NOW the question remained that payments which have not been made o