(1.) Matter is part-heard. Today respective Counsel have concluded their arguments.
(2.) During arguments, my attention has been invited to the orders of this Court dated 20/11/2008, by which this Court has directed Government to file affidavit about the type of Industry carried out by respondent No. 1. That affidavit has been placed on record on 29/7/2010. Its perusal shows that deponent Shri R.B. Jadhav, Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Nagpur, has stated therein that it is engineering Industry. The enquiry report submitted by a Committee of three Government Labour Officers after visiting the establishment shows that, according to them, the issue needs judicial adjudication. They have also placed on record a chart pointing out the machines employed, purpose thereof and nature of activity.
(3.) Shri Kakani, has pointed out that during pendency of present writ petition the establishment of respondent No. 1 has been inspected on 13/2/2006 and therein the nature of employment/Industry has been specified to "residuary" . The similar inspection carried on 4/4/2008 is also pressed into service to show that it also classifies Industry of respondent as 'residuary' one. According to him, both these reports are by two Government labour officers each. He has also brought to notice of this Court that a Minimum Wage application (MWA) No. 1 of 2006 has been filed by Minimum Wage Inspector under section 21 of Minimum Wages Act for recovering alleged arrears on account of difference between wages as paid by respondent No. 1 and wages prescribed for residuary Industry.