KANHAIYALAL BANSAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three applications are being disposed of by this common order as common question of fact and law are involved in the matter.

(2.) THESE applications have been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 24.2.2001 passed by learned CJM, Dhanbad in Factories Act Case Nos. 252/ 2001 251/2001 and 250/2001 respectively under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, under Section 20 of the Payment of Wages Act and under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 and all subsequent proceedings thereto.

(3.) THERE were also contravention of the provisions of Rules 4, 7 and 11 of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. The rate of Minimum Wages duly fixed by the State Government for Hard Coke Industries was not found displayed in the factory. This was contravention of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 read with Rule 22 of the Bihar Minimum Wages Rules, 1951. There was difference between the amount shown in the payment of wages register and the amount actually paid to the workmen. The workers were also being paid piece rate but in the register they were shown as daily wages. None of the workers were allowed weekly off. The workers were not paid any extra amount for the work done beyond their normal working hours i.e. for over time which is in contravention of the provision of Section 59 of the Factories Act, 1948. Workers were not supplied with O.T slips. This was in contravention of Rule 103A of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. Workers were not given identity card. This was in contravention of Rule 80A of the Bihar Factories Rule, 1950. The date of payment of wages was not found displayed which is contravention of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act. It has been alleged that a spot report was prepared in the factory and duly received by an employee for compliance and report asking production of relevant registers and documents but there has been violation of sections 9 and 95 of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Rules 13(i) and 13(i) of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. It has been further alleged that by letter no. OSD/2000/01 dated 9.1.2001 the occupiers of factory were asked to comply with the reported contraventions but no response was received.