LAWS(APH)-1976-9-17

KILARU GOPALA RAO Vs. LABOUR COURT HYDERABAD

Decided On September 22, 1976
KILARU GOPALA RAO Appellant
V/S
LABOUR COURT, HYDERABAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The legal question raised in this writ petition, is whether an alternative remedy under section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act is a bar to an application under Section 33-C (2) of the INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947.

(2.) The essential facts that gave rise to this question may briefly be stated. The 2nd respondent was employed as an electrician in the company of the petitioner from 18-6-1970 to 7-8-1974 and was paid a consolidated salary of Rs. 140/- per month. The workman filed an application on 14-11-1974 under Section 33-C (2) of the INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 claiming Rs. 230/- per month on the basis of G. O. Ms. No. 1507 dt 29-9-1970 which prescribed the minimum wage payable to an electrician. The management filed a counter raising a preliminary objection that the application under Section 33-C(2) of the INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 was not maintainable and that the workman should seek his remedy under Section 20 of the MINIMUM WAGES ACT, 1948 as the claim was one under the said Act. The Labour Court took the view that a claim under the MINIMUM WAGES ACT, 1948 can be made under Section 33-C (2) of the INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947, and overruled the objection. It is this order of the Labour Court that is impugned in this writ petition.

(3.) It is necessary to extract the material portion of Section 20 of the MINIMUM WAGES ACT, 1948, which reads as follows: