Delhi High Court - Orders
D.N. Basu , Director For M/S Simplex ... vs Inspector Manish Mahajan And Anr on 26 July, 2022
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1161/2021, CRL.M.A. 5923/2021
D.N. BASU , DIRECTOR FOR M/S SIMPLEX
INFRASTRUCTURE PVT .LTD.
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Rahul Pratap, Advocate.
versus
INSPECTOR MANISH MAHAJAN AND ANR
..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Ashish Tyagi, Mr.Parvesh Tyagi
and Mr.Vaibhav Sharma, Advocates
for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 26.07.2022
1. This petition is filed for quashing of the complaint being C.T. No. 931/2020 filed under Section 18 & 19(4) read with Rule 26(1), 26(2), 21(4), 21(4A), 25(2) punishable under Section 22(A) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and consequential orders dated 18.12.2019 and 31.3.2021 vide which the matter was taken up for trial.
2. It is alleged summons issued against the petitioner have caused grave injustice since the petitioner is not involved in employing the security guard Raghunath Maithi. It is submitted the petitioner had given a work order to respondent No.2 for providing supporting hands viz. the security and housekeeping services and it was respondent No.2's responsibility to pay the salary to such employees and there was never any master/servant relationship between respondent No.1 and Raghunath. Following clauses of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.07.2022 15:09 the work order amended to R2 are relevant :
4. The Personnel provided by you shall be your employee and it shall be your duty to pay their salary every month as per prevailing statutory be cash/cheque/DD. There will be no Master and Servant relationship between your personnel and us.
5. We reserve the right to cancel the engagement of any of the above personnel on being dissatisfied with their performance.
No compensation shall be paid to you in such an event other than payment of salary up to the actual period of attendance. xxx
7. You shall abide by all relevant Labour Laws/Rules, in force, for your personnel.
8. Wages-cum-Master Register and other statutory documents shall have to be produced to our authorized representative and the competent government authority whenever required.
3. It was the responsibility of respondent No.2 to maintain entire records of attendance, payment of salary to the employees which sum was paid by the petitioner to respondent no.2.
4. One of the employees viz. Raghunath Maithi had filed a complaint through the trade union before the Assistant Labour Commissioner and notice was issued under Section 94 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 to provide all the documents to the Inspector. Per Annexure P-11, the petitioner had informed respondent No.2 about said summons issued and it is alleged it was the responsibility of respondent No.2 to provide entire record to the Inspector. It is submitted not being satisfied the Labour Commissioner filed complaint and respondent No.2 before the learned trial court admitted his guilt and made payment of fine as provided under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act. It is submitted a bare perusal of the complaint of the Labour Commissioner annexed at page 44 would reveal no allegations are made against petitioner herein and the word Management is only written without specifying as to if it is the management of the petitioner Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.07.2022 15:09 or of respondent No.2.
5. He also challenges the impugned order wherein no reasoning is given. However, a bare perusal of Section 19(4) would reveal that Inspector has the power to issue summons to any person, to produce any document or thing or to give information to the Inspector and any violation thereof would be punishable under Section 22A of the Act. Section 19(4) and Section 22 A of Minimum Wages Act read as under :
Section 19. Inspectors -
xxx 19(4) Any person required to produce any document or thing or to give any information by an Inspector under sub-section (2) shall be deemed to be legally bound to do so within the meaning of section 175 and section 176 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
Section 22A. General provision for punishment of other offences. --
Any employer who contravenes any provision of this Act or of any rule or order made thereunder shall, if no other penalty is provided for such contravention by this Act, be punishable with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees.
6. During the arguments learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any document if they had ever provided the record to the Inspector per Section 19(4) of the Act to satisfy him that they were not liable to make payment to the workmen viz. Raghunath Maithi. The record, if any, submitted to the Inspector; be filed before the next date of hearing.
7. List on 14.12.2022.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
JULY 26, 2022 VLD Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.07.2022 15:09