Kalyan Silks Thrissur Pvt. Ltd vs Assistant Labour Officer on 25 January, 2022
7. Sri.N.Nandakumar, learned Senior Counsel, duly
instructed by Adv. Pooja Ramachandran vehemently contended
that a complaint at the instance of the Inspector is not
maintainable under the Minimum Wages Act as the remedy of an
aggrieved employee is to initiate proceedings under the
Industrial Disputes Act or before other authorities and not
W.P.(C) No.10835/21 & Conn. Cases
-:8:-
through a complaint before the Authority under the Act. It was
argued that the power under section 20 is only to fix the rate of
wages and not to adjudicate on the quantum of wages paid or
payable. According to the learned Senior Counsel, in cases
where there is an alleged short payment of wages lesser than the
minimum wages fixed, the remedy is to move the Labour Court
under section 33(C) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1942 or under
the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. The learned Senior Counsel
further relied upon the decisions in Town Municipal Council,
Athani v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hubli and Others
(AIR 1969 SC 1335), which was reiterated by the Supreme Court
in Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. v. Chandi Lal Sadu and
Others (1991 1 LLM 304) apart from the decisions in Union of
India v. Kameshwar Dubey and Others (1988 (2) LLJ 302),
Gulab Govindrao Lanjewar v. Maharashtra State Road
Transport Corporation and Another (1996 (1) LLJ 308).