Teachers in private schools are not 'workmen' within the meaning of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and therefore the notification issued by the State Government fixing minimum wages for teachers in private schools is invalid.

( 1 ) THIS is a writ petition filed by petitioner seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to enforce the notification dated December 1, 1984 (Annexure- 2 to the writ petition ). The notification relates to the enforcement of minimum wages to the teachers and staff of the Primary Schools issued in exercise of the powers under clause (b) of Sub-section (1) and Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3 read with Clause (1)of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Act No. 11 of 1948) read with section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act No. 10 of 1897 ). It was issued after having invited objections from the affected parties and suggestions in respect of proposals published. The notification is to regularise wages of untrained teachers, trained teacher and Junior Basic teacher etc. So it relates to the trained and untrained teachers rates and wages from Rs. 325 to 515/- per month. In this notification the category of workers i. e. fourth class peon, cleaner and other unskilled workers, rickshaw chalak, etc. have also been mentioned. We are not concerned with them in this petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a primary school registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 and is running the school at Varanasi. It is a private school. The petitioner challenges the vires of notification on so many grounds. But worth mentioning the ground on which the challenge has been made is that the teachers cannot be treated as workers as contemplated unclear the industrial Disputes Act or Minimum Wages Act and as such the notification is not applicable. It has also been challenged that the petitioner has no capacity to pay in case of implementation of notification and as such it has to be quashed.

( 3 ) THE petitioner alleged that it is imparting disciplined education to the children. The petitioner school never got or availed Government money by way of financial Government aid. The petitioner seeks that the labour department be restrained not to enforce it.

( 4 ) THERE is a counter affidavit on the part of labour department reiterating the stand of due publication of the notification and its validity and applicability.

( 5 ) THE writ petition was admitted and the notification was stayed. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the material on record.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to our notice cancelling similar type of notification issued by Haryana Government for applying minimum wages to the different categories of teachers and employees serving in private school. The language is the same as of the notification issued by the U. P. Government. It has been struck down by the Honble Supreme court in Haryana Unrecognised Schools Association v. State of Haryana (1996-II-LLJ-639 ). The honble Supreme Court has made the following observations at p. 642 :

"a combined reading of Section 2 (i) and 27 make it explicitly clear that the State Government can add to either part of the Schedule any employment where persons are employed for hire or reward to do any work skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical. If the persons employed do not do the work of any skilled or unskilled or of a manual or clerical nature then it would not be possible for the State Government to include such an employment in the Schedule in exercise of power under Section 27 of the Act. Since the teachers of an educational institution are not employed to do any skilled or unskilled or manual or clerical work and therefore could not be held to be an employee under Section 2 (i) of the Act, it is beyond the competence of the State government to bring them under the purview of the Act by adding the employment in educational institution in the Schedule in exercise of power under Section 27 of the Act. The state Government in exercise of power under the Act is not entitled to fix the minimum wage of such teachers. Decision of Punj