- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. A case was instituted under Section 20 (2) of the Minimum Wages Act alleging that 22 workmen had worked in the establishment of the petitioner from 02.02.2007 to 05.05.2007. For this work the total payment made was only Rs.10,000/ -which was less than the minimum wage prescribed. Accordingly there was a demand for payment of the minimum wages and compensation. The petitioner did not contest the proceeding and therefore, the case of the workmen remains uncontroverted. On the facts which have been mentioned above and which remain uncontroverted an award was made against the petitioners under the Minimum Wages Act. The petitioners appealed against the same. The appeal has been dismissed. When the petitioner did not contest the proceedings nor challenged any of the averments of the workmen, it is not open to the petitioners, that too in writ jurisdiction to start questioning the facts uncontroverted facts alleged by the workmen. 3. The only other argument of the petitioner is that the case was not covered by the Minimum Wages Act. This argument is also misconceived because whether a case will or will not be covered under the Minimum Wages Act will depend upon the facts and the facts as mentioned above clearly indicate that on the uncontroverted findings recorded, the workmen were not paid the minimum wages. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed.;