Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.24 seconds)Section 14 in The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
Mangananese Ore (India) Ltd vs Chandi Lal Saha And Ors on 1 November, 1990
In Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. v. Chandi Lal Saha, AIR 1991 SC 520, the dispute was as to grain supplied at concessional rates and the amount paid as attendance bonus can be treated as minimum wages. The dispute was in respect of deduction of aforesaid amount from the wages. Supreme Court held that if there is no dispute as to rates between the employer and the employee and the only question is whether a particular payment at the agreed rate is due or not, then Section 20(1) of the Minimum Wages Act would not be attracted at all, and the appropriate remedy would only be either under Section 15(1) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, or under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act."
Town Municipal Council, Athani vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hubli ... on 20 March, 1969
12. Supreme Court in Town Municipal Council Athani v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court Hubli, AIR 1969 SC 1335, has specifically held that the purpose of Section 20(1) seems to be to ensure that the rates prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act are complied with by the employer in making payments and, if any attempt is made to make payments at lower rates, the workmen are given the right to invoke the aid of the Authority appointed under Section 20(1). Contrary view taken by High Courts is not liable to be accepted. Provisions of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 do not exclude the jurisdiction of the Authority appointed under Minimum Wages Act, 1948, exercised by him under Section 20 of the Act. There being no express provisions, exclusion of jurisdiction of the Authority under Section 20 of the Act, cannot be inferred.