Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 66316
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. DHANABAL, J
The Management Copral Energy Private Limited Rep.By Its Managing Director S.R. Jeyaprakash – Appellant
Versus
The Joint Commissioner Of Labour SALEM – Respondent
WP No. 21314 of 2023|WMP NO. 20713 OF 2023|WMP NO. 36498 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Ravindran, Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Bazeerahamed
For the Respondents: Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Additional Government Pleader for R1, Mr.K.M.Ramesh, Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Subramani for for R2 to R57
The total remuneration paid to employees under the Minimum Wages Act must meet statutory minimum requirements without necessitating separate payments for basic and dearness allowances.
Headnote:(A) Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Sections 2(h) and 3 - Writ Petition challenging order of Joint Commissioner under M.W.Case No. 34 of 2022 regarding non-payment of minimum wages - Petitioner's argument: wages paid exceed minimum fixed by government notifications, including allowances - Respondents claim basic pay and dearness allowance must meet minimum requirements separately - Court observed that total wages paid by petitioner met minimum standards, ruling that such wages cannot be disaggregated into components - Order quashed as perverse and not aligned with statutory requirements. (Paras 1-22)
(B) Legal interpretation of 'wages' under the Minimum Wages Act as encompassing all remunerations, necessitating total remuneration to meet statutory requirements without separation of components.
Facts of the case:
The petitioner contested the findings of the Joint Commissioner that determined it had not paid the minimum wages due to consideration of components of wages rather than total remuneration in the case of employees 2-57, who alleged underpayment. (Paras 1-10)
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the total payments made by the petitioner were compliant with the minimum wages regulatory framework and that the authority's interpretation was flawed, necessitating dismissal of the claims for additional payments. (Paras 21-22)
Issues: Whether minimum wages mandated by the government should be paid separately as basic pay and dearness allowance, or can be aggregated as total remuneration. (Paras 15-20)
Ratio Decidendi: Inclusion of total remuneration suffices to meet minimum wage obligations under the Act, rejecting the necessity for line-item separation between allowances and bases. (Paras 19-20)
Result: Writ Petition allowed; order quashed, and claims dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed to quash m.w.case order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. minimum wages not paid as per government guidelines. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner's payments claimed to satisfy minimum wage requirements. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments regarding separate payment of basic pay and allowances. (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. definition of wages under minimum wages act. (Para 14 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. judicial precedent regarding minimum wage calculations. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 7. writ petition allowed; m.w.case order quashed. (Para 22) |
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent in M.W.Case.No.34 of 2022 dated 21.04.2023, and to quash the same.
2. The respondents 2 to 57 herein have filed an application through their Union before the first respondent under the Minimum Wages Act as per the GO passed by the Government through G.O.No.67(2D) 13.11.2017. The said application was allowed. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. According to the respondents 2 to 57, as per GO, for the years 2021, 2022 and 2023, the petitioner management have not paid the minimum wages. Therefore, they have approached the authorities under the Minimum Wages Act . According to the petitioner, they paid the wages more than the amount fixed by the Government in GO and for the year 2020 and 2021, they paid a sum of Rs.13,414/-, for the year 2021-2022, paid a sum of Rs.13,992/- and for the year 2022-2023 paid a sum of Rs.14,346/-. Therefore, they are not liable to pay any amount. However, the authorities under the payment of , directed the petitioner to pay the minimum amount as per GO, i.e., minimum basic, dearness allowance and other allowances cannot be taken into account to fix the minimum wages.
4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner factory is engaged in manufacturing of Copper and Aluminium Conductors (Wires and Strips). The workmen of the petitioner Management are paid reasonable wages which has been mostly the minimum rates of wages fixed for employment in General Engineering and Fabrication Industry. The workmen of the petitioner are paid component of wages, split as basic, dearness allowance, house rent and other allowances.
5. As per Section 2 (h) of the Minimum Wages Act , 1948, 2''(h) ''wages” means all remunerations capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of contract of employment, express or implied were fulfilled, be payable to a person employed in respect of the employment or of work done in such employment and includes house rent allowances, but does not include house-accommodation, supply of light, water and medical attendance; any contribution paid by the employer to any pension Fund or Provident Fund or under scheme of social insurance; any travelling allowance; defray special expenses entitled on him by the nature of the employment; any gratuity payable on discharge.
6. Section 3 of Minimum Payment of Minimum Wages Act enables the appropriate Government to fix minimum rate of wages payable to employees employed in an employment as specified in Part-I or Part-II of the Schedule. The Government of Tamilnadu normally fixes minimum rate of wages consisting of basic pay and variable dearness allowances within an inbuilt mechanism for upward revision of dearness allowances on every April of the year. During September 2022, the respondents 2 to 57 filed applications before the first respondent claiming that they were paid less than the minimum wages fixed for the employment in General Engineering and Fabrication Industry as the emoluments paid by the petitioner as basic pay and dearness allowances should alone be considered for compliance of minimum wages notification by excluding the payment of house rent and other allowances.
7. On the side of respondents 2 to 57, 38th respondent M.Pachaiyappan was examined as P.W.1 and marked exhibits Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4 through him and his salary w
