LABOUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER Vs. VIJAYARAGHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are appeals against acquittals in S.T.C. Nos. 37 of 1979 and 38 of 1979 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Palghat. The appellant, Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) Coimbatore, filed two complaints against the common respondent, railway contractor, for noncompliance with certain provisions of the. Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for show the Ad) and the Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950 (for short the Rules). The respondent as the contractor for the Railways was constructing staff quarters for the Railway Staff, near Parali Railway Station in 1979. The complainant inspected the work spot of the respondent on 15.11.1979 at 4 P. M. The respondent was not present there, though his workers were present. P.W. 1 found that the register of wages, register of over-time, register of fines, deductions for damages or loss, etc. were not maintained at the work spot as required under Rules 26(1), 25(2), 2 1(4) respectively of the Rules. He issued Ext. P1 notice, which was received by the respondent as seen from Ext. P2 postal acknowledgment and to which the respondent sent Ext. P3 reply. Since the reply was found unsatisfactory the prosecution was launched against him, that is S.T.C. 37 of 1979. During the inspection, the complainant also found that the respondent failed to display notices containing minimum rates of wages and abstracts of the Act and the Rules and other particulars as required under Rule 22 of the rules; the respondent failed to issue wages slips to the workers as contemplated under Rule 26(2) and failed to maintain muster roll at the work spot as required in Rule 26(5) of the Rules. This is the subject matter of S.T.C. No. 38 of 1979. Prosecution was launched after notice was issued and which brought forth an unsatisfactory reply. The respondent pleaded not guilty in both the cases. In each case the complainant was examined as P.W. 1 and Exts. P 1 to P3 were marked. On the defence side no evidence was adduced. An attempt was made during the cross-examination of P.W. I to suggest that there was no inspection at till as alleged. However, the trial Magistrate found that the prosecution cannot stand since the complainant had not issued a communication or notice as contemplated under Rule 26 B (2) of the Rules and acquitted the respondent in both the cases. The acquittals are now challenged by the complainant by special leave.

(2.) There is no dispute that the respondent is an employer with reference to a scheduled employment in Item No.7 of Part I of the schedule to the Act. He was engaged in the construction of staff quarters for the Railways near the Parli Railway Station. Minimum wages had been prescribed for payment to the workers engaged in such employment. Payment of minimum wages and certain other benefits are conferred under Sections 12 to 17 of the Act. Section 18 of the Act requires the employer to maintain registers and records regarding the particulars stated there in such form and in the manner prescribed. If also requires the employer to keep exhibited in the prescribed manner in the factory work spot or the place of employment notices in the prescribed form containing the prescribed particulars. The section also authorizes the appropriate government by ruks to provide for the if use of wage books or wage slips to employees employed in a scheduled employment in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed. Section 19 empowers the appropriate government to appoint inspectors for the purpose of the Act and their powers are also defined therein. Section 22 of the Act provides for penalties for certain offences. Residuary section 22A states that any employer who contravenes any provision of the Act or the rule or order made thereunder, shall, if no other penalty is provided for such contravention by the Act, be punishable with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees. Section 22 B of the Act provides for cognizance of offences and the limitation thereof. Section 29 deals with the power of the Central Government to make rules and Section 30 deals with the power of the appropriate Government to make rules. The appropriate government in relation to this case is the Central Government.

(3.) To effectuate the purpose of the Act the Central Government has framed rules as already mentioned. Chapter IV of the Rules deal with computation and payment of wages, hours of work and holidays. Rule 21 deals with the time and conditions of payment of wages and deductions permissible from wages. Sub-rule (4) states that all fines imposed and deductions made shall be recorded in the registers maintained in Forms I and II respectively and those registers shall be kept at the work spot and maintained up-to-date. Rule 25 deals with extra wages for overtime. Sub-rule (2) states that register of overtime shall be maintained by every employer in Form IV in which entries shall be made as and when overtime is worked in any establishment and registers will be kept at the work spot and maintained up-to-date. Rule 26 deals with the forms and registers and records. Sub-rule (1) states that a register of wages shall be maintained by every employer in the work spot in Form X. Sub-rule (2) states that wage slip in Form II shall be issued by every employer to every person employed by him at least a day prior to the disbursement of wages. Sub- rule (5) requires every employer to maintain at the work spot a muster roll in Form V andihat the attendance of each person employed shall be recorded daily in. that form. Rule 22 states that notes in Form TX-A containing the minimum rates of wages fixed together with extracts of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and the name and address of the Inspector shall be displayed in English and in a language understood by the majority of the workers in the employment at the main entrance to the establishment and its office. According to the complainant all these provisions have been violated by the respondent.