JUDGMENT:

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 10.02.2003 in W.C.No.6 of 2002 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Nalgonda, whereunder the Commissioner awarded an amount of Rs.75,964/- as compensation along with interest at 12% per annum.

2. The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company, who is respondent No.2 before the Tribunal.

3. The appellant herein is respondent No.2, respondent No.1 is the applicant and respondent No.2 is the respondent No.1 before the Tribunal. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the claim petition before the Tribunal.

4. There is no dispute with regard to the accident and the quantum of determination of amount.

5. Learned standing counsel for the Insurance Company has restricted his contentions on two grounds. Firstly, as per the admission of the workman as well as the employer, the wages admitted were Rs.1,300/- per month, whereas the Commissioner has granted the minimum wages over and above the agreed amount. According to him, the contract between the employer and the employee prevails over the statutory requirement and therefore, the Commissioner ought not to have awarded the amount over and above the contracted wages. It is also his submission that the terms of the policy of the contract show that the interest is not payable by the Insurance Company and it is the owner who has to pay the statutory interest required under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, ‘the Act’) for delayed payment.

6. There is no representation for the applicant – claimant.

7. In this regard, the definition of wages as stated under Section 2 (h) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is required to be referred to, which reads as under:

““wages'' means all remuneration, capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of the contract of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment [and includes house rent allowance].”

8. A reading of the above definition would show that two conditions are required for wages. The first condition is, wages should be payable to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment and the second requirement is that they should be payable, if the terms of the contract of employment express or implied were fulfilled. The expression “if the terms of contract of employment, express or implied were fulfilled” refers only to such terms of contract of employment as are required to be fulfilled by the employed person. The said expression has no reference to the terms of contract, which are to be fulfilled by the employer. The object of Minimum Wages Act is to provide that no employer shall pay wages to the work done in certain categories of workers less than the minimum wages prescribed by the notification under the Act. The Minimum Wages Act applies to the employees or the workmen, employed in scheduled employment. As per the notification given by the Government of Telangana, the workers employed in private transport are also included in the schedule of employment.

9. In this regard, Section 25 of the Minimum Wages Act also requires to be referred here, which reads as under:

“Any contract or agreement, whether made before or after the commencement of this Act, whereby an employee either relinquishes or reduces his right to a minimum rate of wages or any privilege or concession accruing to him under this Act shall be null and void in so far as it purports to reduce the minimum rate of wages fixed under this Act.”

10. Any contract, which reduces a right to minimum rate of wage is declared as null and void insofar as it purports to reduce the minimum wages fixed. This means, even if any agreement is there between the employer and the workman, whereunder less wages are agreed, such agreement is null and void. The ri