B NARASIMHA PAI Vs. DAMODAR BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner being an emplovee of the first respondent concern, made an application under S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 praving that the amount due to him may be determined and consequential orders passed. In annexure attached to his application, he savs that he was employed or a monthly salary of Rs. 55 and was being paid batta at Rs.2.50 ps per dav. The minimum wafes with reference to his employment as a Checking Inspector was fixed in July 1962 at Rs.83 per month, Rs 48 being basic wages and Rs.35 being the dearness allowance. The petitioner's complaint is that he was not paid the full minimum wages, hut was paid less Rs.28 per month In this regard he claims a sum of Rs.854. Subsequent to February 1965 the first respondent is alleged to have deduetpd a sum of Rs.28 per month from his daily batta and therefore he claims the payment of the same, and this amounts to Rs.353 upto the date of petition In all, he claims a sum of Rs.1207 as due from the first respondent

(2.) The first respondent contested the claim of the petitioner and four issues were framed. They are as hereunder:

(3.) Shri Shivaramiah, the learned counsel for the first respondent supports the second respondent's order on a ground different from that which has been set out in the impugned order. The first respondent's contention is that in view of S.15 of the Payment of Wages Act, the authority that can entertain the petitioner's application is the authority appointed under that section. He points out that in exercise of powers under the aforesaid section, the State has appointed the District Magistrate, South Kanara District as thr authority for South Kanara District. He also points out that the Payment of Wages Act being a special enactment and the jurisdiction having been vested in the District Magistrate, South Kanara, the Labour Court, viz., the second respondent cannot entertain any petition which comes under the provisions of S.15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. It is seen that under S.22 of the said Act, bar of suits has been provided. Section 22 reads as follows: