MANI BHUSAN CHOWDHURY AND ANOTHER Vs. ON THE DEATH OF ANIL KUMAR ROY, HIS HEIR AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SUNIL KUMAR ROY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under S. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code for revision of an order passed by the District Judge of Cachar in an appeal under S. 17 (1) (a) of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 arising out of an order of the Authority directing payment to the opposite party of the wages claimed. It appears that there was a dispute between the clerical employees of the Tea Estate and the Management. The Labour Inspector appears to have been present at the discussion and so also the petitioner Sri P.C. Bhatia who is a Director of the Tea Company. The parties came to an agreement on 10th May, 1954, by virtue of which it was settled that when the Minimum Wage Order is amended to allow gardens with less than 7.5 maunds yield per acre, to grant increments, the employees named in the agreement would be paid emoluments specified against their names in a separate paragraph of the agreement with effect from 1st January 1954; but till such amendment is made, they would continue to draw the pay which they were drawing.

(2.) THE order is now challenged in revision before us on two grounds. It has been contended by Mr. Ghose in the first instance that the opposite party being employees on monthly payment, their case would not fall under the Payment of Wages Act and, therefore, the Authority concerned has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim.

(3.) THESE decisions quite clearly show that the Authority in the present case did not exceed his jurisdiction in determining the matter with reference to the wages payable to the opposite party which they had claimed in the circumstances. We accordingly find no substance in the application, which we dismiss with costs: hearing fee Rs. 50.