PONDUR MILK PRODUCERS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY Vs. AUTHORITY UNDER MINIMUM WAGES ACT AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR ONGOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Same questions of fact and law are involved in these two writ petitions. Stay has been granted by this Court and vacate stay applications have been filed. The controversy is very short the writ petitions already stand admitted, counters have been filed and the learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at length, therefore the main petitions are decided by this judgment.

(2.) These petitions are filed against the orders passed by the Authority underthe Minimum Wages Act. By the order under challenge, the authority allowed the claim of the respondent and directed payment of difference of wages as it was found that minimum wages had not been paid. The order is challenged mainly on two grounds. (1) that the claim itself was time barred, and (2) that, in terms of Schedule to Minimum Wages Act, 1948 the writ petitioner is not an employer subject to Minimum Wages Act.

(3.) It is true that the claim had been filed beyond time and an applicationfor condonation of delay had also been filed before the competent authority and the competent authority by order dated 30th August, 1997 condoned the delay. That order was not challenged. Since the competent authority has considered the grounds for condonation of delay and also has considered the objections taken by the writ petitioner before him, I do not think that this ground is available to the writ petitioner now at this stage. Therefore, the first argument that the order was passed in the claim petition beyond time cannot be accepted and is rejected.