Case Laws related to the Payment of Wages Act, 1936
Baboo Hussain vs IVP Nopany, 1979
The question arose whether a boiler attendant and worker who would be considered as the worker under the Payment of Wages Act?
It was held that since the person is working during three shifts a day and doing a considerable amount of duty, he would be liable for the wages even if he is actually not present there.
Balmer Lawrie Workers Union, Bombay & Ors. vs Balmer Lawrie & Company Ltd & Ors, 1985
The objective of the Act was defined in this case. It was held that the aim was to provide regular wages at regular intervals of time.
In this case, the term factory was defined. It was held that it comprises of the sawmill and grinning factory under the same roof and with locomotives, provided it does not employ less than 10 persons. This definition was in accordance with the Factories Act, 1948.
In this case, it was held that railways' worship would be covered under the term factories as defined under the Factories Act, 1948.
In this case, the term 'factory' has been defined. It was held that factories include any area where the manufacturing process is carried out, machine rooms, shed or godown etc. would be covered under the definition of factory.
In this case, the term wages has been defined. It was held that wages include any amount from contracts, awards, or settlements under any statute.
Purshottam vs Potadar, 1986
In this case, it was explained that employment provided under Section 18-19 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is held to be payment under this Act.
In this case, the Karnataka High Court held that in case the strike is illegal or not valid the deduction of wages in such a strike would be a valid deduction.
French Motor Car Co. Ltd. Worker's Union vs French Motor Car Co. Ltd.
In this case, it was held that the principle of 'no work, no pay' would be valid in case the strike is illegal or longer than a period of three days.
Nathulal vs MP State Road Transport Co. and Anrs. 1965
In this case, it was held that the damages awarded in case of direct loss or negligence by the employee is a valid one.
Management of Jawahar Mill Ltd. vs Industrial Tribunal, 1965
In this case, it was discussed when the deductions from the wages is valid. It was held that under Section 9, in case of the absence from the duty in case of an illegal strike, the deductions so made would be valid.
Union of India vs Kameshwar Dubey and Ors.
In this case, it was discussed what is the difference between the 'deducted wages' and the 'delayed wages'. Section 15 has deductions used in a wider sense. This means taking away or denying liability for paying the wages.
Pyarelal vs Executive Engineer and Anrs.
In this case, it was held that the petitioner would be entitled to fullback wages as per the Industrial Disputes Act, 1948. The interest or the compensation on the actual wages would not be included in this case.
Comments
Post a Comment