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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 33133

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
T.S.RAMACHANDRAN – Appellant
Versus
THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The question that arises for resolution is whether the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 can entertain a complaint filed by the Inspector under section 20(2) of the Act, alleging non-payment of minimum wages by an employer.

2. When the Inspectors appointed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') filed applications alleging that the writ petitioners in these writ petitions who are the employers, refused to pay the minimum wages to its respective employees, the employers claimed that there is no jurisdiction for the Authority under the Act to determine such a question. W.P.(C) No.10835 of 2021 is treated as the leading case and the facts of the said case alone are narrated in this judgment.

3. Petitioner is running a textile business, having several showrooms all over the State. The Assistant Labour Officer, who is the Inspector appointed under section 19 of the Act, conducted an inspection on the establishment of the petitioner on 20.12.2019 and alleged that wages paid by the petitioner to 31 employees were less than the minimum wages fixed for the period, June 2018 to November 2018. The Inspector filed an application before the Authority appointed un

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