Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant -UCO Bank against the order of learned Single Judge dated 1.8.2007 whereby the earlier order passed by this Court dated 21.3.2007 was modified and the appellant has been directed to pay to the respondent -workman minimum wages by seventh of each month.
(2.) BY the first order, which was passed on 21.3.2007, the appellant was directed to pay the last wages drawn by the workman from the date of filing of the writ petition by them before this Court, i.e., 7.8.2007. It appears that the respondent -workman thereafter filed an application for modification of that order, which has been allowed by the impugned order. Shri Vigyan Shah, learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that according to section 17 -B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Court could only grant the wages last drawn by the workman inclusive of any maintenance allowance admissible under any rule. It was argued that the object of grant of the last drawn wages is altogether different than the payment of minimum wages, where the workman is actually required to discharge duties. When the operation of the award in the present case has been stayed by the Court, there was no occasion to modify the first order which directed the grant of minimum wages. Learned Counsel in support of his arguments relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in Dena Bank v. Kirtikumar T. Patel, 1998 (78) FLR 45 (SC).
(3.) SHRI Suresh Kashyap, learned Counsel for the respondent workman opposed the appeal and submitted that subsequent to passing of the first order dated 21.3.2007, the respondent -workman came across certain other orders passed in the case of other workmen wherein the direction was given to pay the minimum wages in terms of section 17 -B of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act'). Taking a clue from those orders, the respondent -workman made the application for modification;