- (1.) THESE three applications are being disposed of by this common order as common question of fact and law are involved in the matter.
(2.) THESE applications have been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 24.2.2001 passed by learned CJM, Dhanbad in Factories Act Case Nos. 252/ 2001 251/2001 and 250/2001 respectively under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, under Section 20 of the Payment of Wages Act and under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 and all subsequent proceedings thereto. Facts leading to the filing of these applications are that the petitioner has been prosecuted for offences under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, under Section 20 of the Payment of Wages Act and under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948. It has been alleged in the complaint petition that M/s Om Sri Durga Hard Coke Manufacturing Company Private Ltd., situated,at village Amjhore, P.O. Baliapur, district Dhanbad is a registered factory under the Factories Act, 1948 and names of Smt. Vimla Bansal and Sri K.L. . Bansal have been recorded as occupier of the factory and in the memorandum of articles of association submitted in past in the office of the opposite party no. 2, the names of persons have figured in the list of Board of Directors. Vivek Bansal, for the first time in the year 1977, has signed in the application for renewal of the licence of the factory in the capacity of occupier of the factory but no document was available in the office of the opposite party no. 2 to show that Vivek Bansal was the Director of M/s Sri Durga Hard Coke Manufacturing Company Private Ltd. whereas S.C. Roy, a low paid employee functioning as Munshi, has signed as an occupier of the factory in the renewal application. MP. Bansal has ultimate control over the affair of the factory for the purpose of the Factories Act, 1948 but has been left out from the list of Board of Directors. Smt. Bimla Bansal is the wife of MP. Bansal and petitioner is the younger brother of MP. Bansal. Director No. 4 is the daughter of MP. Bansal. Vivek Bansal is the son of MP. Bansal and S.C. Roy is virtually a Munshi and in any case MP. Bansal is to be treated as the Manager of the factory as provided under the provisions of Section 7 (5) of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Rule 2(M) of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. It is alleged that complainant in course of inspection found that the licence of the factory either in original or its attested copy was not displayed in the factory. Sri P.N. Verma stated that the licence of the factory for the year 2000 has been signed by the Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Bokaro, who was not competent to renew the licence of the factory in absence of any valid order/notification issued by the Government. Licence for the year 2001 was also submitted to the Deputy Inspector of Factories, Bokaro for renewal. Since the licence of renewal was not submitted to the opposite party no. 2 as directed by him in time, as such it will be deemed that the factory is running without a licence.
(3.) THERE were also contravention of the provisions of Rules 4, 7 and 11 of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. The rate of Minimum Wages duly fixed by the State Government for Hard Coke Industries was not found displayed in the factory. This was contravention of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 read with Rule 22 of the Bihar Minimum Wages Rules, 1951. There was difference between the amount shown in the payment of wages register and the amount actually paid to the workmen. The workers were also being paid piece rate but in the register they were shown as daily wages. None of the workers were allowed weekly off. The workers were not paid any extra amount for the work done beyond their normal working hours i.e. for over time which is in contravention of the provision of Section 59 of the Factories Act, 1948. Workers were not supplied with O.T slips. This was in contravention of Rule 103A of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. Workers were not given identity card. This was in contravention of Rule 80A of the Bihar Factories Rule, 1950. The date of payment of wages was not found displayed which is contravention of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act. It has been alleged that a spot report was prepared in the factory and duly received by an employee for compliance and report asking production of relevant registers and documents but there has been violation of sections 9 and 95 of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Rules 13(i) and 13(i) of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950. It has been further alleged that by letter no. OSD/2000/01 dated 9.1.2001 the occupiers of factory were asked to comply with the reported contraventions but no response was received.;