LAWS(KAR)-2014-4-291

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYAT Vs. DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER

Decided On April 15, 2014
Chief Executive Officer Zilla Panchayat Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions though listed for orders, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties are finally heard and disposed of by this order.

(2.) THE lis brought before court lies in a narrow compass. Petitioners claim to have financed the hostels run by the State, by engaging the services of Cooks for preparing food in the hostels. According to the petitioners a Warden appointed by the State is required to look into the engagement of persons for the aforesaid purpose and report, on a monthly basis, the total amount of wages to be paid to employees so engaged, at the rate of minimum wages fixed by the State Govt. in terms of the Notification dt. 11.12.2001. The lis brought before court is that before the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, invoking subsection (2) of Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 filed a claim application dt. 23.5.2011 in respect of respondents No.1 to 12 and another application dt. 20.7.2011 in respect of respondents 13 to 16 claiming difference of wages for the period from 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2011. In that proceeding petitioners opposed the claim by filing statement of objections denying the claim. The 1st respondent filed an affidavit dt. 17.8.2011 and thereafterwards the 17th respondent - Labour Officer, by order dt. 30.5.2012, impugned, directed petitioners to pay Rs. 6,95,570/ - and Rs. 9,65,570/ - to respondents 1 to 16.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that 1st respondent did not place records relating to the appointment and wages paid every month in respect of 16 respondents for the period 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2011. Learned counsel hastens to add that except for the 1st respondent's statement on oath, there was nothing worth the while to establish the relationship of employer and employee between the parties or the fact of short payment of minimum wages during the period of alleged employment. Learned counsel submits that it is the Warden who was required to place relevant material such as the acquittance register or other such documents to establish the jural relationship between the parties.