UNION OF INDIA Vs. LEKH RAJ JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which requires determination in the present case is whether it is open to an authority appointed under the Payment of Wages Act to embark upon an enquiry as to what the salary of a certain person should be.

(2.) The petitioner in the present case is one Lekh Raj who is employed as a clerk in the carriage and wagon section of the Northern Railway at Delhi. He entered service on 7-1-1933 and started officiating in the higher grade on 21-7-1944. Owing to the recommendations of the Pay Service Commission all the members of the clerical establishment including the petitioner were placed in the scale of Rs. 55-3-65/4-125-5-130. The petitioner kept on drawing salaries at the rate of Rs. 89/-, Rs. 93/-, Rs. 97/-, Rs. 101/-, Rs. 105/-Rnd Rs. 109/- per mensem during the period commencing with 1-1-1947 and ending with 2-7-1952. On 3-7-1952 the petitioner's salary was refixed at Rs. 93/- per mensem as it was alleged that another official by the name of Indar Singh, who had come from Pakistan, ranked above him In the grada-tion list. The petitioner accordingly brought the present petition under Section 15, Payment of Wages Act. He claimed that during the period 3-7-1952 to 2-10-1952 he was paid a sum of Rs. 148/- per mensem instead of Rs. 1717- to which he would have been entitled if the salary had not been reduced. The trial Court found in his favour and made an order the relevant portion of which is in the following

(3.) The preamble to the Payment of Wages Act declares that this Act was put on the statute book with the object of regulating the payment of wages to certain classes of persons employed in industry. Sub-section (3) of Section 15 of this Act runs as follows: "When any application under Sub-section (2) is entertained, the authority shall hear the applicant and the employer or other person responsible for the payment of wages under Section 3, or give them an opportunity of being heard, and, after such further inquiry "(if any) as may be necessary, may without prejudice to any other penalty to which such employer or other persons-is liable under this Act direct the refund to the employed person of the amount deducted, or the payment of the delayed wages, together with the payment of such compensation as the authority may think fit, not exceeding ten times the amount deducted in the former case and not exceeding ten rupees in the latter." Then follows a proviso which is not relevant for the decision of this case.