- (1.) The petitioner University of Rajasthan, has impeached the order dated 11th November, 1997, passed by the Payment of Wages Authority, Jaipur, primarily on the ground of jurisdiction and has approached this Court with the prayer, which reads thus:- "It is, therefore, requested that writ petition of the petitioners be admitted and allowed and order dated 11/11/97 of the Payment of Wages Authority, Jaipur be quashed and set aside by passing a writ of certiorari or writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction quashing the order dated 11/11/97 of the Payment of Wages Authority, Jaipur. Any other order or direction, as is deemed fit, proper and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this case, the same be also passed in favour of the petitioners and cost of petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioners".
(2.) Shorn off unnecessary details, the indispensable essential material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised are: that the respondent number 2 (Dayal Singh S/o Shri Dan Singh) was engaged temporarily with effect from 1st April, 1993 to 31st October, 1993, on daily wages basis, in view of the vacancy that occurred in the office of Dean, Students Welfare, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that respondent number 2 also approached this Court by way of S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 508/1995, claiming wages for the period of 1st January, 1993 to 31st March, 1993 and from November, 1993 to December, 1994. This Court by an order dated 11th March, 1997, issued a direction to calculate the wages for the period aforesaid and make the payment within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The respondent number 2, thereafter, filed a complaint before respondent number 1 i.e. Authority appointed under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1936', for short), claiming wages for the period of 1st January, 1995 to 30th June, 1997 amounting to Rs.24,960/- (Rupees : Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty) and compensation thereon to the tune of Rs.2,49,600/- (Rupees : Two Lakhs and Forty Nine Thousand and Six Hundred). The petitioner-University did not appear before the Authority appointed under the Act of 1936 (respondent number 1) and as a consequence, impugned order dated 11th November, 1997, was made under Section 15 of the Act of 1936 for an amount of Rs.24,960/- (Rupees : Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty) and compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees : Ten Thousand) in addition i.e. a total amount of Rs.34,960/- (Rupees : Thirty Four Thousand Nine Hundred & Sixty), to be paid within 30 days.
(3.) Learned counsel, Mr. Rupin Kala, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, reiterating the contents of the writ application, has vehemently argued that no effective service, of the notice of the proceedings initiated on the complaint made by the respondent number 2 before the respondent number 1 (the Authority appointed under the Act of 1936) claiming wages, was made. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner-University is not amenable to jurisdiction under the Act of 1936 and therefore, the impugned order dated 11th November, 1997, is absolutely illegal, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of Section 1(4), which determines the applicability of the Act of 1936 to the persons employed in the establishments specified thereunder.;