P DORAIKANNU Vs. PROPRIETOR HOTEL SAVOY MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that requires an answer in this revision petition is whether the payment of Wages Authority has jurisdiction to award wages for the period during which the workman was suspended pending enquiry into the charges. The petitioner was employed by the respondent as a cashier on a monthly salary of rs. 100 in addition to free boarding etc. By an order dated 1-3-1961, the petitioner was suspended with effect from 3-3-1961, pending enquiry into certain charges against him, the details of which need not be set out here. But as no enquiry was started, the petitioner presented an application before the Payment of Wages authority under S. 15 (2) of the Payment of Wages Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for an order directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 1,680 as representing his wages upto that date. The Payment of Wages Authority, while rejecting the petitioner's claim for some months on the ground of limitation, directed the respondent to pay the petitioner Rs. 1,100 at Rs. 160 per month for seven months as wages and cost of free food.

(2.) THE respondent carried an appeal to the Chief Judge of the Court of Small causes, contending that it was not within the powers of the Payment of Wages authority as the claim does not fall within the ambit of S. 15 of the Act. The submission found favour with the appellate tribunal with the result that the order of the payment of wages authority was reversed and the application of the petitioner dismissed. In his opinion the payment of wages authority could not decide as to the validity of the suspension of the petitioner by the respondent. It is this judgment of the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes that is the subject-matter of this revision case.

(3.) THE point taken by Sri Ramaswami in this revision petition is that the appellate tribunal failed to appreciate that S. 15 (2) of the Act is attracted to all cases where the wages are withheld for some reason or other and is not confined to cases of withholding of wages for the actual work done by the employee. We are disposed to accede to this proposition.