- (1.) BOTH these writ petitions involve common question of law and facts, as such they are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) FOR the convenient disposal of both these writ petition, the facts given in the case of S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2515/1988; Union of India & Ors. Vs. Karansingh & Anr. are taken into consideration. The petitioner, Union of India, by this writ petition has prayed that by a writ of prohibition, the respondent No. 2 may be restrained from proceeding further in the Claim Case No. PW 190/87 in pursuance of the application filed by respondent No. l under Section 3 of the Payment of Wages Act. Respondent No. l Karansingh is a Central Government employee and is working as Postal Assistant in the Head Post Office, Sikar under the control of the Superintendent of Post Offices, Sikar. The respondent No. l submitted an application before the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act for payment of wages under Section 3 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (referred to hereinafter as "the Act" ). The respondent No. l submitted the aforesaid application for payment of wages for the period from April 1987 to November, 1987 amounting to Rs. 11,047/- by moving an application which has been placed on the record as Annex. P. l. The petitioners joined the issue before the Authority under the Act and raised an objection that the Authority under the Act has no jurisdiction to entertai in the application as the service matters as defined is Section 3 (q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (referred to hereinafter as "the Act of 1985") relating to Central Governm entemployees will have to be heard and decided by the Tribunals created under the Act of 1985 and and the Authority under the Act cannot deal with such matters. It is further contended that by virtue of Section 28 of the Act of 1985 the jurisdiction of all the courts except the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been excluded. Therefore, the Authority under the Act cannot decide this matter. A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. l and the respondent No. 1 submitted that the Authority under the Act is not a court or Tribunal. Therefore, the jurisdiction of such authority constituted under a Special Act is not barred. It is submitted that it is not a civil court in strict sense though it has trappings of a court. I have heard both the learned counsel and have also perused the record.
(3.) THE Authority created under the Act is not a judicial court, but it is known as a quasi-judicial authority/court and it has the trappings of the court. A Division Bench of this Court has occasion to examine this issue as to whether the authority under the Act is a court or not so as to amenable to revisional jurisdiction of this Court. It has been held that the Authority created under the Act is not a court, but they are quasi-judicial authorities and they are not civil courts so as to be amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. In the case of Mewar Textile Mills Ltd. , Bhilwara v Girdharisingh and others (1) this court observed as under : - "the authority appointed by the State Government under S. 15 of the Payment of Wges Act is not a Civil Court and is not subject to the revisional jurisdiction of the High court under S. 15. " Similarly, in the case of Bijey Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. Inspector of Payment of Wages Act and others (2), this Court reiterated the same position and it was observed as under : - "accepting the position that the Authorities under the Payment of Wages Act (namely, the authority hearing a petition under S. 15 of the Act and the appellate Court hearing an appeal under S. 17 of the Act) are quasi-judicial tribunals and not Courts, a matter like this must be determined on the analogy of Order 3, rule 4, of Civil Procedure Code. " Therefore, by two successive decisions of the Division Benches, it is established beyond doubt that the Authority under the Act is not a court and they are quashi-judicial tribunals and as such they are not civil courts. Once it is held that they are not civil courts then the jurisdiction of the Authority under the Act is not barred by virtue of Section 28 of the Act of 1985. Therefore, this authority being not a civil court and a quasi judicial tribunal/authority, can hear and decide the matters arising out under the Act and such jurisdiction of the Authority cannot be excluded. Section 29 of the Act of 1985 only excludes the jurisdiction of the civil courts to decide the service matters of the Central Government employees. But this does not debar the special authorities created under the special enactments as they are authorities and they apply the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code to the extent it is made applicable to such quasi-judicial authorities. Therefore so far as the question of payment of wages to such employees of the Central Government is concerned, there is no prohibition them to approach the authority created under the Act. ;