HASMAT RAI BURMAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ashutosh Jha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, and Mr. Umesh Narayan Dubey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Nobody appears on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6.

(2.) Petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for setting aside the order dated 15th July, 2003 (Annexure-4) passed by Respondent No. 2 under the provision of Section 20(3) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), whereby claim made on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 for payment of prescribed minimum wages has been allowed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is a builder and had undertaken certain construction work at Purnea allotted by the State Bank of India. For completion of the construction works, the Petitioner had engaged certain employees/workmen including Respondent Nos. 4 to 6, and, in his submission, the employees were paid more than the prescribed rate of minimum wages, and, there-fore, the claim on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 for payment of prescribed rate of minimum wages was/is not justified. He further submits that though notices issued by Respondent No. 2 were received by the Petitioner, and on the date fixed, a short adjournment was prayed on behalf of the Petitioner on certain valid ground, but that was rejected, and proceeding was concluded ex parte behind the back of the Petitioner without giving him reasonable opportunity of hearing and without affording him opportunity to place his case in proper perspective before the prescribed authority.