Special Officer, Karimangalam Milk Producers Co-operative Society vs Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Authority under the Minimum Wages Act) and Another

P. Sathasivam, J.—The Special Officer, Karimangalam Milk Producers Co-operative Society, Dharmapuri District, aggrieved by the order

of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Authority under the Minimum Wages Act), Salem 7, made in M.W No. 54 of 1993, dated August 9,

1993, has filed the above writ petition to quash the same on various grounds.

According to the petitioner the Karimangalam Milk Producers Co-operative Society is a society which deals in collection of milk from various

members and transports the same to the Milk Producers Union. The society works for about 2 hours in the morning and for about 2 hours in the

evening for collection of milk from its members. On total, the society engages employees for about four hours in a day for the purpose of collecting

milk and transporting the same to the Milk Producers Union. The employees are paid on the basis of the number of hours they work. The Registrar

of Co-operative Societies fixes the cadre strength in the co-operative societies. Hence, the society cannot appoint more persons than what the

Registrar stipulates and the recruitment will have to be done on the basis of the rules of Tamil Nadu Government or the circulars issued by the

Registrar of co-operative societies. The employees of the society could not be paid more salary than what is fixed by the Registrar of cooperative

societies. Further, these employees do not work in their society alone and they work elsewhere also. The petition filed by the second respondent

was for the purpose of obtaining directions from the first respondent in order to collect the difference of wages for the 6 employees mentioned

therein, the difference of wages being wages paid and wages ought to have been paid under the notification issued under the Minimum Wages Act.

On wrong application of facts and issues of law, the authority has now directed the petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs. 9,552.50 being the

difference in minimum wages payable to the workers mentioned in the impugned order. Having no other effective remedy, the society has filed the

present writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Sri M.R. Raghayan, learned counsel for the petitioner after taking through the claim petition filed by the second respondent, the defence taken

by the authority and also the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and Rules contended that in the light of the specific

provisions in the Co- operative Societies Act and the directions/circulars of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the impugned order of the first

respondent based on the minimum wages fixed by the Government as per G.O. Ms. No. 473, dated March 22, 1990, cannot be sustained. As

rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a perusal of the order of the authority shows that it had applied the order of the

Government made in G.O.Ms. No. 473, dated March 22, 1990 which fixed minimum rates of wages to the employees employed in shops and

commercial establishments. On the other hand, it is demonstrated before me that the petitioner''s society is covered by the Tamil Nadu Co-

operative Societies Act and Rules and the society collects milk from the members and the society is working only four hours and the employees

are also working elsewhere to earn their livelihood. It is also brought to my notice that these employees are not fully qualified and they were not

recruited through Employment Exchanges. It is also the specific case of the petitioner that the employees of the co- operative societies are covered

and controlled by the rules/notifications/circulars issued by the Registrar of Co- operative Societies. Therefore, in such circumstances, as rightly

argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is not clear how the authority has applied the order of the Government made in

G.O.Ms. No. 473C dated March 22, 1990, which is an order passed by the Labour department.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to my notice the conclusion arrived at by P. SHANMUGAM, J., in W.P. No. 4473 of 1996,

etc., batch, dated November 15, 1999 wherein the learned Judge had referred the decision reported in Ajoy Kumar Banerjee and Others Vs.

Union of India (UOI) and Others, and observed :

It has to be held that the special law, viz., the Industrial Disputes Act, may have to yield to the latter general law, i.e., the Co-operative Societies

Act.

Further after analysing the various provisions and the contentions raised by both the parties, the learned Judge has concluded (in Para. 89) that the

service conditions relating to employees of co-operative societies as set out under the Co-operative Societies Act, the Rules the Bye-laws are

special laws made with the competence of the State Legislature and are binding on the employees

In the light of the above mentioned details and in view of the nature of work being attended to by the employees in this case, I am satisfied that

the first respondent authority has committed an error in applying G.O.Ms. No. 473, dated March 22, 1990. Hence the impugned order of the first

respondent in M.W. No. 54 of 1993, dated August 9, 1993, is quashed and the writ petition is allowed. No costs.