MUMBAI KAMGAR SABHA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition takes exception to the notification dated 12th September 1983 issued by the Industries, Energy and Labour Department of the Government of Maharashtra, vis-a-vis the minimum wages payable to different categories of employees and servants working in shops and/or commercial establishments, in the state of Maharashtra.

(2.) THE Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is the medium through which minimum wages are fixed for various employments. The primary requirement for the applicability of the Act is to classify different types of employment as scheduled employments for which it is intended to fix minimum wages under the said Act. Once an industry gets listed as a scheduled employment, the State Government becomes entitled to fix minimum wages for the employees engaged therein. Shops and commercial establishments are to be found all over the State and thus were included in the schedule to the Act. After inclusion, the minimum wages were fixed for the first time in the year 1959. The question of revising the same for the third time came up in 1981 and the State Government appointed a Committee for this purpose under the Chairmanship of Mohamed Amin Khandwani, a Member of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly. The Committee had an equal number of representatives of owners and employees and the Member secretary was an Assistant Commissioner of Labour. The Committee visited different places in the State, queried various person and then came out with a report suggesting minimum wages payable to different classes of employees in different regions. Broadly, the division between shop employees was in three categories i. e. unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled. The State was divided into 7 regions and the minimum wage payable for the different categories in these regions was laid down. This wage was to be supplemented by a special allowance and the extent to which the same was to be given was specified zonewise, the number of such zones being four. The State Government after receipt of the report issued a notification accepting the same and it is that notification which is impugned by the petitioners, who are a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, and an office-bearer thereof.

(3.) THE contention of the petitioner is that the concept of minimum wage is a well defined one and this has been brought out in several decisions of the Supreme Court. The Khandwani Committee had made basic errors while trying to comprehend what a minimum wage amounted to. This apart, it did not give reasons as to why particular figures were accepted as the minimum wage for different classes working in the different regions. Shortly stated, the report is an unreasoned document and its recommendations should not have been accepted by the Government. This contention is countered by the State Government which contends that all the relevant factors were taken into consideration and that the report was unanimous in that it had concurrence or not only of the employers representatives, but also of those representing the workmen. A report drawn up after a great deal of effort and which had the additional virtue of unanimity should not be set aside at the instance of only one of the trade unions amongst the many existing in this State.