ARVIND KUMAR, J. - (1.) By this judgment, we propose to dispose of CWP Nos.4940 and 4941 of 2004, as in both the petitions a common question of law and facts is involved.
(2.) First of all we would like to refer to the facts of CWP No.4940 of 2004.
(3.) Respondent No.4 Binder Singh (hereinafter called as private respondent) claiming himself to have worked at the brick kiln of the petitioner-firm, filed an application under Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act (for brevity, the Act) before respondent No.3 exercising the powers under the Act, alleging therein that he had worked with the petitioner-firm from September 12, 1998 to November 25, 1998. He was paid Rs.79,190/- whereas his contract with the petitioner-firm was for Rs. 1,50,000/-. Thus, he prayed for payment of Rs.70,810/- on account of less wages paid as also the compensation to the tune of 10 times of the aforestated amount, from the petitioner-firm.;