D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) Notification dated 4th February, 1992 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) issued under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act. 1948, fixing minimum rate of wages in respect of the employees employed in the units manufacturing miniature bulbs and glass products except optical lenses and glass bangles making industry in U. P., is the subject-matter of challenge in the present writ petition,
(2.) Mr. J.N. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing with Mr. Rakesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not a manufacturing unit and it does not manufacture any glass product, therefore, it is not covered by the said notification. Secondly he contends that life of the Advisory Board constituted under Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act. 1948 (hereinafter called as the said Act) having expired on 15.10.1990 and no Board having been constituted thereafter, the notification is void and is a nullity since it has been issued without consulting the Advisory Board. His third contention was that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before fixing the rate of wages. He fourthly contends that alternatively even if the Board is constituted, the same does not include any representative of the employer. He contends fifthly that in the rates fixed 100% neutralisation of dearness allowance has been prescribed which is not permissible under the law. His sixth contention was that while fixing the rate of wages, it is not permissible to determine or lay down any condition of service. His last contention was that instead of fixing the rate, a formula has been fixed on the basis whereof calculation in respect of each individual workman is to be worked out which is not permissible under the said Act. Inasmuch as it is the rate which is to be fixed and not to lay down a formula for calculation of wages.
(3.) Mr. J.N. Tiwari ably assisted by Mr. Rakesh Tiwari had also relied upon several decisions which will be dealt with at appropriate stages.;