Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - (1.) The petitioner No.1 was appointed in April 1993 and petitioner No.2 was appointed in October 1992 as Helper with the respondents-department. The petitioners preferred this joint writ petition challenging the award of the Tribunal dated 3/3/2005 and also claimed setting aside their termination order dated 31/10/1994 with all consequential benefits. The petitioners had preferred a claim petition through Union which was heard by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur on the following points of reference:- whether the Office of Assistant Engineer, Motor Garage, Chougan Stadium, Gangouri Bazar, Jaipur had not been given regular appointment with all consequential benefits and had wrongly terminated the service of the petitioners w.e.f. 31/10/1994
(2.) Learned Industrial Tribunal was of the view that the petitioners could not support their case with the help of documents and none of the affidavits carried the facts that the petitioners had discharged 240 days of regular service. The learned Court below has held that since the services for 240 days and one year was not established by the documents furnished and facts mentioned by the petitioners. Therefore, the controversy does not fall within the domain of protective legislation of Section 25-F of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. Thus, the claim petition of the petitioners were dismissed.
(3.) The Petitioners preferred proceedings under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 before the Court concerned whereby the Petitioners claimed minimum wages with effect from their date of appointment in 1993-94 respectively. The learned Authority recorded the statements of the petitioners that the petitioners were in continuous service even after April, 1994 and were receiving wages. The learned Authority also recorded that it is reflected by the documents that daily four hours overtime was rendered by the petitioners and therefore the petitioners were entitled for overtime payment for overtime payment under Section 20 sub-Section 2 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 whereby the petitioners were entitled for overtime payment for a period of six months. Thus, the order dated 27/10/1997 directed the respondents to grant the benefits of overtime keeping in mind the provisions under Section 20 sub-Section 2 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.;