Karnataka High Court
The Taluk Social Welfare Officer, vs T Konappa S/O Tirumallappa on 28 January, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi
Bench: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE # DATED THIS THE 28" DAY OF JANUARY 2009 BEFORE RIT PETITION No. 8459/2008(L-F 2) . BETWEEN: 4 THE TALUK SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER. SRINIVASAPLIRA TQ | KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR, iy THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY | > i SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTN! ENT : VIKASA SOQUDHA ~ eae BANGALORE, 9 ao mo ', ee --PETITIO i a RE (BY SRI. JAGADEESH MUNDARG| GA ) 4 T KONAPPA S/O TR UMALLARPA. A . GOVT. HOSTEL FOR BOYS, _ SRINIVASAPLIRA TALUK, SRINIVASAPURA, KOLAR DIST. : MN RAMESH SX) NARAYANASWAMY OC COOK. > GOVT Puc STUDENTS HOSTEL ~ SRN: VASAPURA YALUK, SRINIVASAPL JRA. KOLAR DIST: : ha. - 8. R NARAYANA SWAMY S/O RAMAPPA 6 OOO: COOK: . GOVT, PUC STUDENTS HOSTEL. _ SRINVASAPI JRA TALUK, SRINIVASAPLRA, KOOL AR DIST. 4 ANJAMMA WIO NANJUNDAIAH - . OC:COOK, ont NIVASAPL URA TALUK, SRINIVASAPLIRA, KOLAR DIST oy "ey 11 . "A t bok + DLAKSHMIPATHI SI DASAPPA OCC COOK, GOVT PUC STLIDENTS HOSTEL, SRINIVASAPURA TALLIK SRINIVASAPLIRA KOLAR DIST G VENKATARAMANA Si) GANG! SEPA nen 'COOK, VP BUC STURENTS HOSTEL SRINI VASAPURA TALUK SRIAI YASAPI JRA KOLAR DST. S NARAYANAPPA oe ee one SRI NiVASAPL, eA TAI "4 'SRI NIVASAPURA,.. KOLAR DIST M SATHYAM S/O MUNISWAMY OCC-COOK GOVT PLIC STUDENTS HOSTE:. SRINIVASAPLIRA TALLC SR: Ni IVASAPURA, | KOLAR DIST CN KRISHNADPA S 30 ) NARAYANAPEA 7 OCC COOK 5 - GOVT, PUC-STUBENTS: HOSTEL SRINIVASADLUIRA TAL Uk, SRI NVASAPL RA, KOLAR DIST. M SHIVAKUMAR S/O MIU vent aee OCC-COOK, >. GOYT PL JC STUDENTS HOSTED SRINIVASAPURA TALLIK, SRINI VASAPURA, ~ KOLAR DIST. NAPAS: MHA REDDY SO MAR APRA OCC COOK "GONT BCYS HOSTEL ADDAGAL SRINVASAPLIRA TAI L UK, SRINIVASAPURA, KOLAR DIST . YENKATAL EKSHMAMMA AIO MUNISHAMI . OC COOK, _ GOVT BOYS HOSTEL GONAPALLL SSINIVASAPLURA TALUK SRINIVASAPURA KOLAR DIST. KOM MANJUNATH S/O KRISHNAPPA OCC: COOK, GOVT, BOYS HOSTEL, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, SRINIVASAPURA KOLAR DIST. id wend ia) 16 17 48 A oo TMS ies MK DEVARAJ S/O KRISHNAMURTHY OCT-COOK, GOVT ROYS HOSTEL, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK SRINIVASADURA KOLAR DIST YR IANARDHAN SHO BUICHAPDA Occ: COOK, GOVT BOVS HOSTEL GONAPALLI GRINIVASAPURA TQ. SRINIVASAPLIRG KOLAR DIST. G NAGARA! SIO JANGAPPA Oe COOK, OWT BOYS HO os El 1 AKSHMIN AGAR. TAL Go SRIN IVASAPLIR OLAR DIST. OO OCeCOOK GOVT BOYS HOSTEL SOMAYA. AL "AHAI Li. SRINIVASAPI IRA TALL tk SRINIVASAPURA, KOLAR DIST VENKATAMMA Wit) VERKATES SHAPPA ' | CCl COOK . . GOVT, Puc STUDENTS oe HOSTE| SRINIVASAPLIRA FALUK, SRI AVASAPURA, KOLAR ot ST. NAANAMMA W/O ML INI NAPPA OCC COOK, *. GOVT, PL iC STUNDE: TS Hos TE SRINIVACAPURA TAL UK, SRi INIVASAPLIRA, KOLAR IS r "OBA EMMA WIG VENKATARAMANA GOOG COOK "GOVT. BUC STUDENTS HOSTEL, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK. SRINIVASAPLIRA KOs, AR DIST. NATHI RAJESHWARI iWiO BABU | OCECOOK: GOVT. GIRLS HOSTEL, GONAPALL, BRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DIST. MANJULAMMA, WIC) VENKATARAMANAPPA. OC® COOK, GOVT. BOYS HOSTEL, ADDAGAL | SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DIST. LUK. SRINIVASAP! JRA, Pad aoe NARAYANASWAMY SIO. THIMMAPPA OCC COOK GOVT BOYS HOSTEL | AKSHMISAGAR SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DIST. 24 RAMAKKA W/O. NARAYANASWAMY. OGG: COOK / a GOVT BOYS HOSTEL, LAKSHMISAGAR, SRINIVASAPLIRA TALLIK © SRINIVASAPLIRA. ee KOLAR DIST oe . RESPOMDENTS (BY SRE K. GOVINDRAY ADV FOR Ri-R?4} WRIT PETITION NO 8459/2008 IF FILED UNDER ARTICLES 296 & 297 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TG. QUASH THE ORDER PASSED Ry THE LABOUR OFFICER, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF MINIMUM WAGES ACT | CASE NO. REFERENCE NO CLAIM41501-02 DT 10.06 2003 VIDE ANNEX.C'a ALLOWING THISWRITPETITION FIC 0 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILE LINDER ARTICLES 296 & 207 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: PRAYING TO PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B! GROUP ETC. Che TS PRELIMINA The State has filed this Writ Petition challenging the order passed by the Labour Officer & Authority "under the provisions of Minimum Wages Act dated 70" June 2003 produced at Annexure-C wherein the Labour Officer has directed the State Government to pay minimum "wages te the respondents.
: on Respondents claim that, they are working in the hostels "established and run by the State Government and they have not been paid the minimum wages. The Authority under the provisions of ~ Minirnum Wages Act considering the material before it. directed the . Government to pay the minimum wages from 1.4.1998 to 31.3.2002. coe :
wt + Thereafter the claimants approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking prosecution against the concerned authority as the ameunt was not paid. Before the learned Sessions Judge, the petitioners made a sought for time for payment of the said amount. in the light Of the :
submission made before the learned Sessions Judge, the District Social Welfare Officer sent a letter to the State Government for providing fund for payment of minimum wages as ordered by the authority under the Minimum Wages Act. After having made said. submission before the learned Sessions Judge, thereafter, as an after thought, this writ petition is filed in June 2008. questisning the order for Payment of minimum wages. oe | |
3. Though Goverment. Advocate submits that the order granting minimum weges passed even before the empioyment of the respondent becanie schedule employment under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, the authority without considering the same has a - directed the State 'Government to pay the minimum wages wef.
"4.41998.
AD Sri. Govindarai, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that, order is passed on 10.6.2003 whereas the ~ writ petition is filed in June 2008 ie. nearly after five years and in between the petitioners had agreed to pay the amount before the earned Sessions Judge. Petitioners having agresd to comply with the said order, now they have filed this writ petition challenging the, same Le. after lapse of nearly 5 years. He submitted that, there is. no ho explanation for the delay and submitted that, ot only the: petitioner 7 were aware of the impugned order, they. alse. partici ipated ce the :
proceedings before the learned Sessions Judge.
5. Without going into the correctiess of the order, ar. si mee the petitioners have agreed before ihe learned § essions, Judge that they would pay the amount as ordersd cand made the learned Sassions Judge to postpone the proc eedings on the said stbmission, now the Government cannoi. deny the same in the Jight of the same, if the Sovernment has already agreed to pay the said amount, in my view, the Government must comply with its promise. Hence, | find no ground to interfere with order irmpugned.
Accordingly, the writ petition fails and same is dismissed. Sa/% Judd?
"KNM/