TOPS SECURITY LTD vs RAGHUNANDAN CHOUDHARY

/* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:""Table Normal""; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-

style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-

right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:106%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-

family:""Times New Roman"",serif;}

VINOD GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1.The petitioner has impugned the order dated 20.05.2014 passed by the Authority under Minimum Wages Act 1948/Deputy Labour Commissioner

(South), Labour Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, by which the claim application filed by 71 workmen through the concerned union against

the petitioner herein for non-payment of minimum wages for the period from October, 2012 to March, 2013, was allowed in exercise of its power

conferred by clause (i) of sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (in short ‘MW Act’) and the petitioner management

was directed to pay the difference of minimum wages along with the compensation to the extent of eight times of the difference of the amount of

minimum wages and actual wages paid.

2.Having admitted the fact of paying less than the minimum wages to the respondent workman under ground ‘F’ of the writ petition, the learned

counsel for the petitioner limits the scope of the writ petition in challenging the impugned order to the extent it awards the compensation eight times of

the arrears of the difference of the amount of minimum wages and actual wages paid.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the authority has not given any reason while directing it to pay compensation eight times of the

difference between the minimum wages and actual wages paid.

4.Learned counsel for both the parties have relied upon a judgment of Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 407/2013, M/s. Tops Security Ltd. Vs.

Tops Detective and Security Services Ltd. Karamchari Union (Regd.) decided on 27.01.2014 wherein the order of the authority under MW Act

directing the appellant to pay compensation/penalty equal to five times of the excess wages due was set aside and substituted with a direction to pay

the excess wages along with three times the compensation.

5.Whenever any claim is lodged with the authority under MW Act under Section 20 (2), the authority under Section 20 (3) (i) of the MW Act after

hearing both the parties is empowered upon finding the employer to have paid less than the minimum rates of wages, to direct the employer to pay the

employee the amount by which the minimum wages payable to him exceeds the amount actual paid, together with the payment of such compensation

as the authority may think fit but not exceeding ten times of such excess amount.

6.The MW Act or the Rules framed thereunder admittedly do not lay down any guideline or criteria for determining the quantum of such

compensation.

7.Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case that the period of the default is only six

months i.e. October, 2012 to March, 2013, it would be appropriate if the direction of the authority to pay the compensation equal to five times the

excess wages due is substituted with a direction to pay three times of the excess amount of wages as compensation.

8.The order so modified shall be complied with by the petitioner within six weeks.

9.In these circumstances, the writ petition and pending applications are disposed of accordingly.