- (1.) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 5691 of 1994, CWP 5877 of 1994 and 5692 of 1994. The facts are being taken from CWP 5691 of 1994.
(2.) Respondent No. 2 Smt. Pali Devi who was an ex-employee of the management petitioner filed an application under section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, against difference in the minimum wages and the wages paid to her. This application was allowed by the authority under the Act vide impugned order Annexure P-5 dated 28.2.1994. Management, being aggrieved, has filed this writ Petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that Smt. Pali Devi was no longer in employment and, therefore, her application under section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act was not maintainable. Reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported as Municipal Committee Raikot v. Sham Lal Kaura and others - Vol. XXVIII (1965-66) The Indian Factories Journal 472, where it has been held as under:- "Having regard to the object and scope of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and its material provisions, the "employee" defined in Section 2(1) of the Act does not include an ex- employee. Therefore, only a person who is in the actual employment of the employer the time of making an application against the employer under Section 20 of the Act is entitled to make the application." This judgment was later followed by a Single Bench of this Court in Mahiya v. State of Haryana and others, 1982(1) SLR 26. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent cited some contrary judgments of some other Courts, taking a different view. Since there is a binding precedent of this Court, we respectfully follow the same and accept the writ petition and set aside the order Annexure P-5 passed by the authorities under the Act. No order as to Costs.;