- (1.) THERE is a co-operative society registered under the u. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 known as Sahabganj Krai- Vikrai Sahkari samiti Ltd. at Chaurahiya Gola, Gorakhpur, hereinafter referred to as the society. It was involved in a dispute whether one Shri Teju son of Durbal was its employee and entitled to receive at least minimum wages under the minimum Wages Act, 1948. It is a matter on record that a complaint had been instituted by the Labour Inspector before the Labour Commissioner/prescribed authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. that minimum wages were not being paid. This complaint was registered as case No. 240 of 1976 in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh through Labour Inspector under the minimum Wages Act 1948 Gorakhpur v. Secretary, Sahebganj Krai- Vikrai sahkari Samiti Ltd. , Gorakhpur. The Society contested this case. The labour Commissioner/prescribed Authority gave its decision on 16 December, 1976, in which it held; in effect, that respondent No. 2, Shri Teju was an employee of the Society and consequently he was entitled to minimum wages @rs. 186/- per month. This decision dated 16 December, 1976 of the Labour commissioner/prescribed Authority aforesaid in Case No. 240 of 1976 was not challenged by the Society, and thus, became final.
(2.) UNFORTUNATELY a reference to this order of the Labour Commissioner / prescribed Authority dated 16 December, 1976 has also not been appended to the writ petition and the Society makes a statement in the writ petition that "the petitioners" Society did not know that a case to the above effect had been decided against the petitioner. " In the writ petition the Society has given an impression as if the aforesaid Case No. 240 of 1976 was decided by the Labour Commissioner/prescribed Authority without the Society participating in the proceedings, and further this decision was not known to the Society. It is regretable that this impression which has been conveyed in the writ petition, is incorrect and may amount to suppression of material facts. This impression could have been avoided if the society had appended the decision of the Labour Commissioner/prescribed Authority, dated 16th december, 1976 as an annexure to the petition. The State of Uttar Pradesh in its counter affidavit has brought this decision on record as Annexure 'ca-1'. A persual of the order of the Labour Commissioner/prescribed authority dated 16 December, 1976 reveals that the Society participated in the proceedings in Case No. 240 of 1976, aforesaid. Thus, contrary to any suggestion which is implied in the writ petition, this decision was not ex parte. The Society should have assailed this final order of the Labour commissioner/prescribed Authority dated 16 December, 1976, as this particular order is very relevant and germane to the issues raised in the writ petition. The suppression of this order, in the manner in which it has been done in the writ petition, warrants a dismissal of the writ petition and in the alternative, equity is now against the Society. But, this Court proposes to deal with the merits of the case also.
(3.) AS already mentioned, this order of the Labour Commissioner/prescribed Authority, became final as it was not impugned or assailed by the society. The order is binding on the Society. Thus, the Society cannot be permitted to resile from this decision given by the Labour Commissioner /;