- (1.) Heard the learned Advocate for the writ petitioners as well as the learned Advocate for the respondent-authorities. The facts of the case, very briefly, are as follows: The writ petitioners represent the employees of the Telecom Factory of West Bengal. The petitioners' case is that all the employees and workers attached to the different units of telecom factories of West Bengal have been paid their monthly wages in cash in terms of Payment of Wages Act, 1936. The writ petitioners have challenged a memo dated 11.05.2005 issued by the Joint DDJ (CA), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. to the Chief General Manager, All BSNL Circles wherein it has been stated that as per the Finance Bill for 2005-06, proposed in the Parliament, there will be a levy of cash withdrawal tax of 0.1% for cash withdrawals of Rs. 1 lakh and above on a single day, made by the corporate and business houses. It was further stated in the said memo that cash withdrawal tax can be avoided by resorting to all the payments by cheque/E-payments and ensuring that the cash drawals is less than Rs. 1 lakh on any single day. In the said memo it was stated that it may be ensured that all the payments are made by cheques/E-payments to avoid cash withdrawal tax and cash withdrawal of Rs. 1 lakh and above on a single day is totally avoided. In a letter dated 31.05.2005 the respondent No. 1 wrote to the Heads of All BSNL Circles (except Jammu & Kashmir). It was stated inter alia that on or after 1st June, 2005 all staff may be advised to get the bank account opened so that all staff claims can be settled through bank account to avoid the banking cash transaction tax and the salary of the employees will be disbursed through bank account from June, 2005 onwards in supersession of all earlier orders. It was further stated in the said letter that if any payment has to be made in cash, on written request of any employee, which result into withdrawals of an amount more than Rs. 1 lakh in a single day from single bank account, the bank cash transaction tax may be recovered from the beneficiary. In the notice dated 3rd June, 2005 the respondent No. 1 stated inter alia that with effect from 01.06.2005 individual cash will be paid restricted to Rs. 5,000/- and that responsibility lies with the individual for taking form for opening salary account with SBI, Chowringhee Branch and, as this is a must, all were requested to contact P.O. TF Alipore for such purpose. It appears that by a notice dated 21.06.2005 the respondent No. 1 issued the following notice with copies to various authorities: NOTICE Re: Option for payment of salary/ wages by cheque or cash. In supersession of earlier payment notices it is notified for information to all concerned that the payment of salary/wages for the month of June' 05 will be disbursed either by cheque or cash with 0.1% transaction tax as per order No. 1001-05/2005/CA-III/BSNL dt. 31.5.05 of BSNL corporate office. Further in consultation with Service Union TF Kolkata it has been decided that payment of BSNLMRS (1st quarter 2005-06) will be disbursed along with salary/wages for the month of June' 05. Staff concerned is to offer written 'option' for cheque/cash payment within 24.06.2005 (Friday) positively. Employees are requested to collect the option Form from CSS(RE) for regular staff or Sr. SS(IE) for industrial staff and may be submitted to CSS(RE)/Sr. SS(IE) respectively. This is issued with the approval of the competent authority. No. CAO/TF/AP/Payment/05-06 Dated, June 21, 2005 (N. C. Naskar) Chief Accounts Officer Telecom Factory, Kolkata-27"
(2.) It appears that by a letter dated 9/6/2005 the respondent No. 1 wrote to the General Manager, Telecom Factory, Alipore, Kolkata inter alia that it is the statutory obligation of the employers to make payment to the workmen under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act.
(3.) The learned Advocate for the writ petitioners submitted that the respondent authorities, prior to the dispute which arose between the parties, have been withdrawing cash from the bank and making payment of wages to its employees but by virtue of the impugned notifications they have, in effect, sought to compel their employees to open a bank account and receive wages by cheque. According to the said learned Advocate, if any employee chooses to receive his wages in cash then it shall become subject to deduction of proportionate tax namely, the banking cash transaction tax. The effect would be that an employee who chooses to receive his wages in cash, such employee will not get his full wages because the aforesaid tax would be deducted proportionately from his wages. According to the said learned Advocate the respondent authorities cannot compel their employees to receive wages by cheque and they also cannot deduct the aforesaid tax proportionately from the wages in case of payments in cash. The said learned Advocate referred to Article 265 of the Constitution, sections 6 and 7 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and submitted that there is no law in force which authorises the respondent authorities to collect such tax proportionately from its employees.;