BHIMSEN SAXENA Vs. BRIJNANDAN BAJPAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MISCELLANEOUS Applications Nos. 139 and 140 of 1955 are consolidated and are being disposed of by a single order because the point for decision in both is a common one, namely, whether a worker's monthly remuneration is covered by the word "wages" as used in the Payment of Wages Act (Act No. 4 of 1936 ).

(2.) THE facts giving rise to these applications are that Brijnandan Bajpai, who is getting a salary of Rs. 120/- per month, and, Har Bhajan Tiwari, who is drawing a salary of Rs. 125/- per month, were employed in the Modern Printing Press, lashkar. Both the employees presented an application under Section 15 of the payment of Wages Act before the Authority appointed under Section 15 of the Act complaining that some deductions have been made from their wages wrongfully. On a notice being issued to the employer, among other pleas raised by him, one was that the applicants were being paid a monthly salary and that therefore their remuneration is not wages and that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim of the employees. The Tribunal rejected the contention and held that the remuneration given to the employees was covered by the term "wages" and that he was therefore competent to enquire into the matter. Against this decision, the employer, Bhimsen Saxena, manager, Modern Printing Press, Lashkar, has filed two petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution, praying that it be held that the dispute is beyond the jurisdiction of the authority appointed under Section 15 of the Act.

(3.) THE question to be considered in this case is whether or not the monthly salary of an employee is covered by the term "wages" under the Payment of Wages Act?