MADAN MOHAN SAMANTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule is directed against a proceeding this is pending before the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, midnapore Sadar under section 22a of the Minimum wages Act for violation of the provision of section 18 (1) of the Minimum Wages act, 1948 and Rule 23 (5) of the West bengal Minimum Wages Rules, 1951.

(2.) THE petitioner is an agriculturist and according to him, his sole income is from the lands which he has inherited from his father and he cultivates these lands personally with the help of hired labourers on wages payable in kind and cash and he makes payment to his labourers according to rate payable in the area where the land are situated. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner comes under the provisions of the Land Reforms Act and as such, he is not to maintain any registers for wages under the West Bengal Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Under section 2 clause (8) "personal cultivation" has been defined as meaning cultivation by a person of his own land on his own account- (c) by servants or labourers on wages payable in cash or in kind or in both. According to minimum Wages Act, "wages" has been defined under section 2 (h) meaning all remunerations, capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of the contract of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a person employed in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment and includes house rent allowance "employee" has been defined in section 2 (i) meaning any person who is employed for hire or reward to do any work, skilled or. un skilled, manual or clerical, in a scheduled employment in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed. "employer" has also been defined under section 2 (e) meaning any person who employs, whether directly or through another person, or whether on behalf of himself or any other person, one or more employees in any scheduled employment in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed under this act. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that under the Minimum wages Act no' provision is made for payment in kind and, there fore, since payment is made by him to his labourers in kind, he would not come within the provisions of the said Act, and moreover, the provisions of the Act would not apply to agricultural labourers. I am unable to accept this contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner. By notification No. 2350-WI4wi2w-1168 1000/lwtlw/2w/72 dated 12. 12. 68 the Minimum Wages have been fixed for employees employed in agricultural lands and the same was revised subsequently on 30th September, 1974 which was further revised by Notification No. 1259-L. W. dated 6th April, 1976. It is, then contended by the Advocate for the petitioner that even if it is assumed that Minimum wages Act, 1948 applies to agricultural labourers the last Notification that is notification dated 6th April 1976 is invalid for non-compliance with the provisions of section 5 (a) and (b) of Minimum Wages Act and hence it should be struck down and therefore, there is no question of keeping wage registers in accordance with the said Notification. To deal with this point it is necessary to look into the provisions of section 5 of the Act. Section 5 provides that in fixing minimum rates of wages in respect of any scheduled employment for the first time under this Act or in revising rates and wages so fixed the procedure laid down in section 5 (a) or (b) should be followed and where the appropriate government proposes to revise the minimum rates of wages by the mode specified in clause (b) of Sub-section (1), the appropriate. Government shall consuit the advisory Board also. The previous Notification of 1974 revising the rates and wages fixed by the Notification of 1968 followed the procedure laid down under section 5 (1) (b) of the Act and the said Notification has fixed rates of wages, in consultation with the said advisory Board. So far as this Notification of 1974 is concerned, the same would be challenged on that ground by the learned Advocate for the petitioner. The Notification of 1975 in paragraph 3 runs as follows :