SUBHASH GUPTA Vs. PAYMENT OF WAGES AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Sri Bashistht Narayan Yadav and 26 others claiming themselves to be the employees of M/s Purvanchal Sahkari Katai Mills Limited, Bahadurganj, Ghaziabad (hereinafter referred to as the Mills). They moved an application under Section 15 read with Section 16 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the 1936 Act) The claim application was registered as P.W, Case No. 159/1992. The petitioners in the aforesaid claim alleged illegal deduction of their salary amounting to Rs. 3,37,196.05 paise for the period of January, 1991 to January, 1992.

(2.) THE claim of the workman was contested by the respondent Mills by filing written statement interalia that the applicants before the Prescribed Authority were not its employees, rather they were employees of Shri Chandra Dhar Pandey a contractor for execution of work of contract of the Mills only. It was further claimed by the employers that they were not responsible for the payment of wages of persons employed as the workmen were not employed in or in connection of any work of manufacture of the Mills or its goods.

(3.) IN rebuttal the workmen stated that as he did not have a licence under the Contract Labour Regulations Act, 1970 and therefore, they were entitled to be treated as the employees of the principal employer and for that reason the principal employer would be liable for the payment of wages of the workmen concerned.