ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. S M MOHD HANEEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 23rd respondent the minimum Wages Authority has proceeded to consider the case without condoning the delay. Therefore, he submitted that the petition deserves to be allowed only on that ground.

(3.) UNDER the first proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, (for short the Act), the application will have to be filed within a period of six months from the date on which the minimum wages became payable. In this case according to the respondents the amount was due and payable for year 1984-85 to 1989 and that the respondents have not made the application within the stipulated time and further, the respondent ought to have made an application under the second proviso to sub-section (2) of section 20 of the Act which provides that the application may be admitted after the said period of six months when the applicant satisfies the Authority that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within such period. He also submitted that the authority has not even considered the question of delay before proceeding to pass the final order. On the other hand, it condoned the delay while disposing of the main matter. Therefore, he submitted that the petition deserves to be allowed on that ground and the impugned order be set aside.