CRR No. 9900002/2011 Page 1 of 4

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

AT JAMMU

CRR No. 9900002/2011

Date of order: 14.09.2018

State of J&K vs. M/s Pardeep Electricals

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Judge

Appearing counsel:

For petitioner (s)

: Mr.R.S.Jamwal, CGSC.

For respondent(s) : Mr. R.K.Gupta, Sr.Advocate with

Mr. Ritesh Mahajan, Advocate.

1.

The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking

quashment of the order dated 01.07.2010 passed by the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Leh (Ladakh), by virtue of which court below has

dismissed the complaint filed by petitioner u/s 22-A of Minimum Wages

Act for violation of rules 22, 26(5), 26(1), 25(2), 21(4) and 26(2) of the

Minimum Wages (central) Rules, with a further prayer to direct the

learned CJM to take cognizance of the complaint and to proceed with the

trial.

2.

It has been stated that the order passed by court below is not in

accordance with law; the court below has refused to take cognizance of

the complaint on technical ground which is not sustainable in the eyes of

law. Section 22-B of the Minimum Wages Act lay down that no court

shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act unless a complaint

thereof has been made within six months from the date on which the

offence is alleged to have been committed. However, the Magistrate has

failed to appreciate that the failure on the part of the respondent to pay

minimum wages to his employees in an act or omission which continues

till the respondent starts paying minimum wages to his employees and

adheres to the other provisions of the minimum wages act, the offence

CRR No. 9900002/2011 Page 2 of 4

shall continue to be committed and the period of limitation shall be

computed with reference to every point of time.

3.

I have considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties.

4.

From the perusal of record, it is evident that the Labour

Enforcement Officer (Central) Jallandhar at Jammu, who has been

appointed as Inspector under sub-Section-1 of the Section 19 of the Act

on 01.07.2010 filed a complaint against the accused/respondent u/s 22-A

of Minimum Wages Act for violation of rules 22, 26(5), 26(1), 25(2),

21(4) and 26(2) of the Minimum Wages (central) Rules. It has been

averred in the complaint that inspection of the work/establishment of the

above mentioned accused was conducted on 19.09.2009 under M.W.Act

and it was found that the accused did not display notices showing

minimum rates of wages fixed, abstract from the Acts and the Rules and

address of inspector in English and Hindi, which was in clear

contravention of rule 22 of the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules 1948. It

was further stated in the complaint that the register of wages under rule

26(1), register of overtime under rule 25(2), register of fine and deduction

for damages for loss under rule 21(4) and accused also did not issue wage

slip to the workers as required under Section 26(2) of the Minimum

Wages Act. On the same day inspection report cum show cause notice was

served on the accused by registered A/D post. As per complainant,

respondent/ accused has committed violation of rules 22, 26(5), 26(1),

25(2), 21(4) and 26(2) of the Minimum Wages (central) Rules.

5.

This complaint was accompanied with a petition for condonation of

delay wherein it has averred that the last date of filing this case was

17.03.2010 but due to administrative reasons the post of (LEO) Jammu

remained