VIJAY PICTURE PLACE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Pramod Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Arvind Kumar, the learned counsel for respondent No. 4.

(2.) THE union filed an application under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act alleging that the employers who are running a cinema Hall were showing four shows in a day and that as per the award, an allowance of Rs. 2 per day was required to be given by the employer who were running four shows per day. Since this amount was not paid, an application under Section 15 of the Payment of wages Act for the period January 1, 1975 to january 31, 1978 was filed. The Union also prayed for payment of compensation amounting to 10 times for wrongful deduction. The prescribed authority, after considering the evidence, and the reply of the employers, passed an order dated March 20, 1979 holding that the workers were entitled to the wrongful deductions. The Prescribed Authority also imposed five times penalty amounting to Rs. 1,51,050. The petitioners, being aggrieved, filed an appeal under Section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act before the District Judge. Section 17 (1-A) states that no appeal would lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the authority to the effect that the appellant had deposited the amount payable as per the order of the prescribed authority. The petitioners along with the memo of appeal moved an application praying that they were not in a position to pay the entire amount and submitted that they may be permitted to deposit the amount towards delayed payment and furnish security for the penalty amount. The appeal of the petitioner was rejected by the authority as not maintainable since the entire amount was not deposited by the petitioners.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner this Court is of the opinion, that the provisions of Section 17 (1a) of the Payment of wages Act is mandatory. The usage of the word "shall" indicates that the amount payable under the orders of the Prescribed Authority is required to be deposited before the authority concerned and a certificate to this effect has to be filed along with the memo of appeal failing which the appeal would be treated as defective and would not be heard until and unless the defect was removed. In the present case, admittedly the delayed payment and penalty was not deposited. Consequently, the appeal was not maintainable and was rightly dismissed by the appellate authority.