- (1.) This writ petition is directed against a notification issued by the State Government for fixing minimum wages for employees employed in brick manufactories. This notification bearing No. 42-M.W./2W-33/2000 dated 7 May, 2002 has been made Annexure-"P-13" to the writ petition. The notification has been issued in terms of proviso to Section 3(1)(b) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Also under challenge in this proceeding is the legality of a notification dated 22 February, 2001 bearing No. 25-MW/2W-33/2000, which was published in the Calcutta Gazette on 20 March, 2001 issued under the said statute containing proposal for revising the rates of wages of said categories of employees. The latter notification contains proposal for fixation of such rates whereas the former, notification has been issued fixing the rates under the provisions of Section 5(1)(b) read with Section 5(2) of the Act. The grounds of challenge are twofold. A notification for fixing minimum wages for the same category of employees dated 12 November, 1997 was challenged by the petitioners earlier by filing a writ petition, which was registered as WP No. 24439 (W) of 1998. This writ petition was disposed of by an Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court on 12 March 1999 with the following directions:-- The notification dated November 12, 1997, having been issued by the concerned authority without giving any hearing to the writ petitioners, the same cannot be sustained in law and as such the same is hereby set aside. Mr. Patranabis, appearing for the State, submits that hearing should be given to the petitioners and for that purpose asked for time for two months to conclude such proceedings. In view of that there will be an order directing the concerned authorities to give a hearing to the writ petitioners and to pass a reasoned order in the matter within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. Till such consideration is effected by the concerned authority the petitioners shall go on paying on the basis of tripartite settlement and/or arrangement entered into between the parties. It is however made clear that I have not gone into the merits of the case and the petitioners will be at liberty to place all the documents if any in support of their submissions. This writ application is thus disposed of without any order as to costs.
(2.) The admitted position is that after the aforesaid order was passed, the petitioners, who claim to be the representative body of the brickfield owners of this State were heard by the Secretary of the Labour Department, Government of West Bengal on 7 November 2000. An order was passed on 8 November, 2000. A copy of this order was made available in course of hearing in which it has been, inter alia, recorded:-- 5. It was contended by the petitioners before me that as Minimum Wages Act provides two alternative methods of finalisation of the minimum wage structure, they would prefer the first alternative mentioned under section 5 (1) (a) under which a preliminary report is to be prepared by a committee appointed by the Government. However, the State Government has already adopted the second procedure provided u/s. 5(1)(b) stipulates that a preliminary notification be issued, representations etc, be considered by the Minimum Wage Advisory Committee thereafter and a final notification issued subsequent to this. Either all these procedures can serve the needs of justice adequately provided, as has been observed by the Hon'ble High Court, the concerned authorities give a hearing to the writ petitioners and pass a reasoned order. It is clear from this order that the concerned authorities in this instance would be either the Minimum Wages Advisory Board or the body working under the direction and supervision of this Board as the Act provides that the State Government would be acting on the recommendations of the Minimum Wage Advisory Board. Therefore, it appears to me it would be possible to issue a fresh preliminary notification and after allowing for enough time for all concerned to file representations, etc. this can be examined under the supervision of the Minimum Wage Advisory Board and the latter body would also deliberate and decide the matter in sufficient detail so that its proceedings would form a part of the record of deliberations on the basis of which the final notification may be issued. 6. For the present, therefore, the Department should issue a fresh preliminary notification under Section 5 and the time for filing of representations etc. may be limited to 4 weeks after the date of issue of notification. Further action thereafter may be taken as outlined in the foregoing paragraphs.
(3.) This order, however, was not communicated to the petitioners. Instead, a fresh notification containing proposal for fixing the rates was published on 22 February, 2001, to which I have referred to in the earlier part of this judgment. After publication of the same, the notification for fixing the minimum wages was published on 7th May, 2002.;