PALI DEVI Vs. CHAIRMAN MANAGING COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the writ petition of the respondent-Managing Committee of the Army School, Jallandhar, upsetting the orders of the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, on the premise that the appellants seeking relief were its ex-em ployees and not existing ones, and hence disentitled to move a petition under Section 20 (2) of the Act for appropriate relief.

(2.) The employees voiced grievance before the Authority that the Army School had not paid them the minimum wages fixed by the State Government from time to time, as per details given in the application, and therefore, they were entitled to reliefs enumerated under Section 20 (2) of the above said

(3.) The High Court relying on an earlier Division Bench decision of the Punjab High Court in Municipal Commitee, Raikot v. Sham Lal Kaura, (1965-66) 28 FJR took the view that the word employee',defined in Section 2(i) of the Act did not include an ex-ecployee. It was held in the said case that a person who is not in the actual employment of the employer at the time of making an application under Section 20(2) of the Act, was not entitled to seek relief. Another single Bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Mahiya v. State of Haryana, (1982) 1 Service Law Reporter 26, in line with the decision of M.C. Raikot's case was taken in aid, to conclude that in the presence of these binding precedents the writ petition merited acceptance and on the basis the orders of the Authority was set aside. This has given rise to these special leave petitions.