- (1.) HEARD Shri Jamal Khan, learned counsel for the applicant (respondent no.5), Shri Atul Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anoop Kumar Srivastva, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State -respondents.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the present case are that the petitioner is a company which runs a factory at Noida. The petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of accessories of various electronic items.
(3.) AN inspection of the petitioner's factory was done by a team of Inspectors on 7.10.2009 on the basis of a complaint made by the respondent no.5 Trade Union. The statements of various workmen were recorded on the spot and a case under section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act,1948 was filed with the consent of the workmen. Conciliation proceedings were initiated on 6.11.2009, 21.12.2009, 6.1.2010, 14.1.2010 and on 27.7.2010. Despite the assurances given by the employer, the payment of minimum wages was not made to the workmen. The prescribed authority under the Minimum Wages Act,1948, afforded opportunity to the petitioner as well as workmen. The applicant filed documentary evidences. The petitioner did not adduce any evidence despite the opportunity afforded. Under the circumstances, an order dated 25.7.2012 was passed by the prescribed authority determining the amount of minimum wages payable by the petitioner to the workmen and also granted compensation totaling in all Rs.22,71,145/ -. According to the petitioner this order is manipulated one, inasmuch as in the certified copy of the order obtained on 197.2013, there is no entry of order dated 25.7.2012, while in the certified copy of the ordersheet obtained on 29.1.2014 n entry of the order dated 25.7.2012 has been inserted in the ordersheet.;