Satish Chandra, J. - (1.) On August 5, 1968, the State Government issued a notification under S. 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, fixing minimum rates of wages in respect of the various categories of employees of hotels and restaurant. The petitioner, which runs a restaurant at Lucknow, challenges the validity of this notification on the following grounds:- (1) That the Advisory Board was not constituted in accordance with the Act. Its recommendations were invalid. (2) That the notification in so far as it prescribes the time-scale of pay goes beyond the purview of the Act. (3) That the notification violates Article 14 of the Constitution. (4) That the fixation of minimum wage rates is vague and unworkable.
(2.) Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, authorises the appropriate Government to fix the minimum rates of wages payable to employees employed in an employment specified in the Schedule to the Act. Section 5 lays down the procedure for fixing minimum wages. One method is to appoint committees to hold enquiries and advise the Government in respect of such fixation. The other is the notification method. The Government is to publish its proposals in the Gazette and invite (representations?) After considering them, the Govt, can, by a notification in the Gazette, fix the minimum rates of wages; provided that, where the Govt, proposes to fix the wages by the notification method, it has to consult the Advisory Board also. Section 8 provides that for the purpose of advising the appropriate Government in this matter, the Government shall appoint an advisory board. The advisory board is to consist of persons, to be nominated by the Government representing the employers and employees in the scheduled employments, who shall be equal in number. In addition, independent persons, not exceeding one-third of the total strength of the Board, have also to be nominated. One such independent person is to be appointed the Chairman of the Board.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Act envisages the consultation with the Advisory Board, in order to prevent the State Government from acting arbitrarily and to have the views of the employers and the employees of the particular industrial employment for which the minimum rates of wages are going to be fixed. The Act, therefore, requires the representative of all scheduled employments to be members of the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board constituted by the State Government did not consist of any member representing the hotel and restaurant industry. The Board was thus illegally constituted. Any recommendation made by it was not valid. There are more than one answers to this submission.;