Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (3.11 seconds)The Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 406 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Federation Of Okhla Industrial ... vs Lt Governor Of Delhi And Anr on 4 August, 2018
12. Appellant had also placed on trial court record his
appointment letter dated 02.03.2017 issued by URSS Tech Service
Pvt. Ltd., wherein his consolidated salary during the probation period
of two years is shown to be Rs.8000/- per month. Though the
genuinity of said document is yet to be tested but, for ascertaining
the quantum of maintenance for the dependents, I am of the view
that the trial court was bound to take into consideration said
document placed by the appellant for claiming his income to be not
more than Rs.8000/- especially when the respondent failed to place
any document to the contrary in support of her claim of higher
income of the appellant. Courts are not oblivious of the fact that
though minimum wages for skilled and unskilled labour have been
fixed by State Governments but, those guidelines and provisions are
not strictly adhered by the employers. And in the prevailing scenario
of mass unemployment, many people have to pick up the jobs at
much lower scale of salary. In the instant case, the trial court has
relied upon the minimum wages prescribed by the Delhi Government
but, completely ignored the fact that the appellant is not the resident
CA No.195/18
Ravi Shankar Jangid vs. Aanchal Sharma Page No.6/9
of Delhi as he lives and works in Rajasthan. Even otherwise, the latest
notification of Delhi Government fixing the minimum wages for
labours at the rates mentioned in the impugned order stands already
quashed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) 8125/2016 &
CM No.3362/2016 titled as Federation of Okhla Industrial
Association (Regd.) vs. LT Governor of Delhi & Anr., decided
on 04.08.2018.
Jagwati vs Gajender Kumar on 1 September, 2016
14. I have gone through the judgment relied upon by the
counsel for appellant in Rupali Gupta (supra) but, the same is
distinguishable on facts in as much as in said case, both the spouses
were highly qualified professionals. Whereas, in the instant case,
aggrieved person is a simple graduate. Employment prospects of a
B.Tech cannot be compared with a person who is just a graduate.
Because of enormous gender disparity prevailing in our society, under
representation of women in work force is still a hard reality.
Considering said social scenario, it is harder for a woman to secure a
job with a decent work environment compatible to her biological
CA No.195/18
Ravi Shankar Jangid vs. Aanchal Sharma Page No.7/9
needs.
Section 12 in The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Section 19 in The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Shailja vs Khobbanna on 18 January, 2017
In this
regard, I further draw support from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Shailja & Ors. vs. Khobbanna, AIR 2017 SC 1174;
wherein it was held by that "whether the appellant no.1 is capable of
earning or whether she is actually earning are two different
requirement. Merely because, the appellant no.1 is capable of
earning, is not, in over opinion, sufficient reason to reduce the
maintenance awarded by the Family Court." While giving above
findings, Hon'ble Apex Court set aside the order of Hon'ble High Court
reducing the maintenance and restored the order passed by the
Family Court. In view of said position of law and the facts and
circumstances of the case, I do not find any merits in said contention
raised by the counsel for the appellant.
1