RADHEY SHYAM Vs. LABOUR INSPECTOR JODHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, Radhey Shyam, a hotel owner has challenged the order of the Minimum Wages Authority, dated July 15th 1980,directing him to pay Rs. 1410/ being the amount of arrears representing the amount less paid than the minimum wages to his various employees.

(2.) THE undisputed facts, are that the petitioner is a hotel owner at Jodhpur and some of its employees who were present at the time of inspection by the Labour Inspector, represented on inquiry that the wages which were being paid to them were less than the minimum wages. On the basis of this inquiry, the Labour Inspector filed an application before the Minimum Wages Authority, Jodhpur. THE Inspector was examined and one Bhim Raj, who is alleged to be the Munim, was examined by the petitioner.

(3.) THE equitable jurisdiction of this Court cannot be invoked by the peti- tioner who has got no legitimate defence against the claim on merits. Even, if it is assumed that in the absence of specific provision he could not have given a direction for depositing the amount, then also it is only in respect of mode of payment and the procedure to be adopted for the same. This Court in Gyan Singh vs. Collector, Bhilwara (2), even after holding that the Collector was not authorized to make the recovery under any law for realization of the land revenue, and he should have proceeded under the Public Demands Recovery Act only, refused to interfere and observed as under: - "in this particular case we fail to understand how the applicant can deny his liability under an order under the Workmen's Compensation Act, though of course he has actually done so. In the circumstances though the Collector was wrong in not forwarding the objection to the officer who had sent him the requisition, we are not prepared to interfere in favour of the applicant whose denial appears to us to be dishonest. "