Full Text
$-25,32&34
+ W.P.(C)4548/2017
EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Petitioner
Through Kumar Rajesh Singh,Standing
Counsel for EDMC
Through None.
$-32
+ W.P.(C)4592/2017& CM APPL.20052-20053/2017
EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Petitioner
Through Kumar Rajesh Singh,Standing
Counsel for EDMC
Through None.
$-34
+ W.P.(C)4595/2017& CM APPL.20060-20061/2017
LAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Petitioner
Through Kumar Rajesh Singh,Standing
Counsel for EDMC
Through None.
% 24.05.2017
CM APPL.19825/2017 in W.P.tCI 4548/2017
CM APPL.20053/2017 in W.P.fCI 4592/2017
CM APPL.20061/2017 in W.P.tCl 4595/2017
Exemptions are allowed,subjecttojustexceptions.
The applications are disposed of.
W.P.ICI 4548/2017& CM APPL.19824/2017
2017:DHC:8141 la
" n
<V- r-
W.P.(a 4592/2017& CM APPL.20052/2017
W.P.(C)4595/2017 & CM APPL.20060/2017
Vide the present petitions (W.P.(C) 4548/2017, W.P.(C)4592/2017 and W.P.(C)4595/2017),the petitioner assails the common impugned orders dated 31.05.2016 ofthe Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 in
No. MW/ED/160,165, 170, 172-174, 176, 177/2014/2103 whereby the East
Delhi Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner was directed to pay the arrears ofminim wages and compensation to each claimant/workmen on accountofthe difference between the notified minimum wages and the wages actually paid to them in view ofthe factum that the contractor M/s. Gaurav
Enterprises had failed to make the requisite payments ofthe wages to the claimants/ workmen.
The details of the claims of the claimants / workmen are tabulated below;- s. Name ofthe Total Wages Less Total less
No. claimants wages payable Minimum payment received per month wages per difference per month month as due claimed
ORDER
1. Sh. Deepak Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Kumar ffom ffom from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2017:DHC:8141 -> ♦ ^ J 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
2. Sh. Om Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Prakash from from from Sharma January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April,2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April,2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
3. Sh. Banwari Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Lai Jangid from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013 2017:DHC:8141
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April,2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April,2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
4. Sh. Manohar Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Lai from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 2017:DHC:8141 / •\ to May, (Rs.10454/-)
5. Sh.Dasaram Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
6. Sh. Naseem Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Ahemad from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. L Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/-.. 2017:DHC:8141 F' / October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
7. Smt. Ganga Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/- Verma from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-)
8. Sh.Kapil Rs.3327/- Rs.7254/- Rs.3937/- Rs.77189/from from from January, January, January, 2013 to 2013 to 2013 to 2017:DHC:8141 \ May,2014 March, March,2013
2013. (Rs.11811) Rs.7722/- Rs.4395/- April, April, 2013 2013 to to September September,
2013. 2013. Rs.8086/- Rs.4759/- October, (Rs.26370/-) 2013 to October, March, 2013 to 2014 and March,2014 Rs.8554/- Rs.28554/- April, and 2014 to Rs.5227/- May,2014 April, 2014 to May, (Rs.10454/-) The petitioner thus seeks that in view of the contract agreement between the petitioner and M/s. Gaurav Enterprises, it was the duty ofthe M/s.Gaurav Enterprisesto makethe paymentsofthe wagestothe claimants/ workmen and the petitioner thus cannot be penalized. On a consideration of the submissions and on consideration of the impugned order dated 24.06.2016 of the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and in view of the verdict of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. VS.Commissioner ofLabour and Orsin Civil Appeal No.11355of1996 decided on 03.09.1996 wherein vide specific observation in paragraph 7ofthe said verdict,it is categorically observed that in relation to Section 21(4)ofthe Contract Labour(Regulation and Abolition)Act, 1970, which provides:- "(4) In case the contractorfails to make payment of wages 2017:DHC:8141 rwithin the prescribedperiod or makes shortpayment, then the principal employer shall be liable to make paymentofwages in full or the unpaid balance due, as the case may be, to the contract labour employed by the contract or and recover the amountsopaidfrom the contractoreither bydeductionfrom any amountpayable to the contractor underanycontractorasadebt payable by the contractor with further observations vide paragraph 8 ofthe said verdict to the effect that "In case the contractorfails to makepaymentofwages,then the principalemployershall be liable to makepaymentofwages in full or the unpaid balance due, as the case may be, to the workers. The principal employer, in turn, is entitled to recover the amount so paidfrom the contractor. Thus, it is clear that underSection 21 also the responsibilityforpaymentofwagesof contract labourers is on the contractor who employs them. In case ofany default by the contractor, the principalemployer is required to make good the default, but at the cost of the contractorfrom whom the principal employer can recover the amount." ^. as admittedly the contractor has failed to pay the minimum wages due to the workmen,the principal employer,the SDMC cannotbe absolved ofits duty to pay make good the default, but it may recover the amount from the contractor. fn the circumstances,the submission made on behalfofthe petitioner seeking waiver/reduction ofthe compensation imposed on the petitioner to be paid equivalent to one time of the difference balance amount of the minimum wages to the claimants / workmen as imposed by the impugned order u/s 20(3)(i)ofthe Minimum Wages Act,1948,is also declined. In view thereof,there is no meritinthe abovesaid petitions. 2017:DHC:8141 ■1 Thepetitions are declinedandtheir accompanyingstay applications are dismissed. ANUMALHOTRaTj^"^ MAY 24, 2017