Bombay High Court
Vishal Intelligence Securities ... vs Regional Labour Commissioner Central ... on 1 August, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:20350
wp-8503-2025.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION No.8503 OF 2025
Vishal Intelligence Securities Services
At. Sh No, Sureshdada Jain Complex,
In front of Kashinath Lodge, Ajanta Road,
MIDC Area, Jalgaon, Through its Proprietor
Shri Dinkar s/o Namdeo Chaudhari
Age-63 years, Occupation- Business
R/o-C/o Shri Samrath Food Products,
M-193, MIDC Area Jalgaon
Tq. & Dist- Jalgaon - 425003. ..Petitioner
VERSUS
1. Regional Labour Commissioner, (Central)
Authority under Minimum Wages Act, 1948
CGO Complex, First Floor, Block C,
Seminary Hills, Nagpur.
2. All India Scheduled Caste &
Scheduled Tribes Railway Employees
Association, Bhusawal.
Through its Divisional Secretary,
Railway quarter No. C-59 DRM office
road, Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon.,
3. The Sr. Superintendent,
Railway Mail Services,
Central Railway, Bhusawal,
Dist. Jalgaon. ..Respondents
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod S. Gaikwad
Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 3 : Mr. R.R. Bangar
...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
RESERVED ON : JULY 15, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : AUGUST 01, 2025
wp-8503-2025.odt
(2)
JUDGMENT :
-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with consent of parties.
2. Present petition takes exception to order dated
07.04.2025/08.04.2025 passed by Regional Labour Commissioner
(Central), Nagpur and Authority under Section 20 (1) of Minimum
Wages Act, 1948 ('The Act' for short), by which petitioner is directed
to deposit within 45 days a sum of Rs.38,08,582/- towards less
payment along with compensation in favour of Assistant Labour
Commissioner (Central), Nagpur under intimation to the applicant
with further stipulation that non-compliance with directions shall
entail proceeding in accordance with Section 20 (5)(b) of the Act.
3. The petitioner is a contractor and engaged in providing
security, care taking, housekeeping and labour services. Original
respondent no.2/Superintendent, Railway Mail Services, Bhusawal
floated tender for supply of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled
outsourced persons to work in different mail office on contract basis.
The petitioner was a successful bidder and he was issued work order.
It is contention of petitioner that the work order was issued belatedly
after 276 days of submission of bid. Later on, Central Government
revised minimum rates of wages for labours vide circular dated
20.04.2017. On 08.06.2017, petitioner started the work under tender
and supplied manpower. The petitioner requested respondent to pay
wp-8503-2025.odt
difference of wages as applicable at the time of floating tender and
enhanced rate vide circular dated 20.04.2017. To which, respondent
replied that para 48 of contract would take care of situation and it is
for the service provider to absorb the duties. On 26.04.2018, the
respondent further extended contract for the period of one year on
the same rate. According to petitioner, his request regarding payment
of arrears of amount was under consideration of Chief Post Master
General, Maharashtra Circle. However, it was rejected. Hence, he
filed Writ Petition No.12644 of 2021 before this Court, which is
pending.
4. While aforesaid writ petition was pending, respondent
no.3/Association approached respondent no.1/Authority for release of
difference of wages as per the Act. The petitioner was served with
notice of hearing dated 17.03.2025. The petitioner submitted his
representation to respondent no.1 to grant opportunity to contest the
claim. However on 08.04.2025, the Authority has passed the
impugned order.
5. Learned advocate appearing for petitioner submits that
the Respondent/Authority was expected to act judiciously and
reasonably. However, respondent no.1 passed orders hastily without
giving a fair opportunity of hearing to petitioner. According to him,
petitioner had entered into contract with respondent no.3 and
undertook work as per approved rates under tender. Subsequently,
wp-8503-2025.odt
the enhanced rates of minimum wages were introduced by Central
Government. Therefore, it is the responsibility of principle employer
to approve and release bills submitted by petitioner as per modified
minimum wages. The petitioner has already filed Writ Petition
No.12644 of 2021, which is pending. Learned advocate appearing for
petitioner further submits that petitioner has also paid minimum
wages as per contractual obligation at prevailing rates at the time of
acceptance of contract. Therefore, any further liability owing to
enhancement in the rates of minimum wages ought to have been
borne by principle employer. Therefore, he would urge that
impugned order be quashed and set aside.
6. Having considered submissions advanced, it can be
observed that there is no dispute that members of respondent
no.2/Union were employed by petitioner in pursuance to the contract
of respondent no.3 and their services were availed by him. The
petitioner is not disputing his liability to pay minimum wages and
non-payment of dues of Rs.37,53,582/- towards 55 contract workers
for the year 2017 to 2019. All workers were employed as security
guards which is the work falling under scheduled employment under
sub-section (1) of Section 22F of the Act. Thus, respondent no.1 is a
competent authority under Section 20 (1) of the Act to deal with
claim application for non-payment of minimum wages under
Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
wp-8503-2025.odt
7. The record indicates that respondent no.1/Authority had
issued notices to petitioner on 04.07.2023, 11.08.2023 and
17.03.2025 and despite of service of notice, he failed to cause
appearance and submit reply. On other hand, respondent no.2
appeared before the Authority and submitted that they have paid all
the bills for the period from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2019 to the
contractor as per the terms of contract, except bill of Rs.4,21,794/- for
period from 26.03.2019 to 31.03.2019. Even the cheque of said
amount is ready which is yet to be collected by contractor. It was
pointed out that the petitioner has filed Writ Petition No.12644 of
2021 before this Court against rejection of supplementary bills
towards enhanced minimum wages and same is pending. Respondent
No.1/Authority found that total amount of Rs.37,53,582/- is due and
payable towards difference of minimum wages towards
petitioner/contractor. Eventually, authority passed the impugned
order dated 07.04.2025 directing petitioner to release the amount
along with compensation @ Rs.1,000/- per day.
8. Although, learned advocate appearing for petitioner tried
to impress upon this Court that liability to release minimum wages
would be upon principle employer, such an issue is not subject matter
of this writ petition. Already petitioner has filed Writ Petition
No.12644 of 2021 before this Court, wherein the dispute between
respondent no.3/Mail Services and petitioner as to liability towards
wp-8503-2025.odt
difference of minimum wages at the enhanced rate is subject matter
of challenge. The petitioner cannot deny his liability, being the
employer, to pay minimum wages as per rates prescribed under
notification issued by Central Government. The petitioner may
prosecute his remedies against principle employer/Railway Mail
Services as permissible under law. However, he cannot withhold the
payment of minimum wages to employees particularly when there is
no dispute regarding their entitlement.
9. The impugned order appears to have been passed after
following due procedure of law. If petitioner has failed to caused
appearance in pursuance of notice and particularly when he has no
defence to avoid liability under Minimum Wages Act, 1948, this Court
do not find any reason to entertain the writ petition. In result, writ
petition stands dismissed.
10. Rule is discharged.
(S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
Mujaheed//
