Comentarios del lector/a

Top Advocate in Chandigarh Secrets

por Jacki Leff (2018-10-21)


The relief which it is authorised to award,is to direct "the refund of the amount deducted, or the payment of the wages delayed". 76 crores and the project was to be implemented within 24 months. Under section 22, no suit lies in any court for the recovery of wages or of any deduction therefrom which could have been recovered by an application under section 15. 5 of the statutory notification of 21. P-16 was lodged and who accepted both the complaints Advocates (1) from Bhurey Lal, and (2) from Ram Pal, has stated in his evidence that when the complaint, Ex.

Such a direction made by the Tribunal is final, under section 17 of the Act, subject to the right of appeal provided therein. 1993 issued under section 49 of the Indian Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The Tribunal is set up to decide "all claims arising out of deductions from the wages or delay in payment of 1366 wages". It is also not without some significance 1343 that admittedly and as a matter of fact, the police did not file any charge-sheet in the present case against any one for the actual offence of murder under section 302, Indian Penal Code and that even in the charge-sheet which they did file they confined the case to section 307, Indian Penal Code but did not commit themselves as to who out of the members of the unlawful assembly was the author of the pistol fire.

Pursuant to the aforesaid Notice, financial and technical bids were received from three firms and the consultant had found all the three bids to Advocates be deficient and recommended for invitation of fresh bids. But it is said on behalf of the respondent that the authority has the jurisdiction not only to make directions contemplated by sub-section (3) of section 15 to refund to the employed person any amount unlawfully deducted but also to find out what the terms of the contract were so as to -determine what the wages of the employed person were.

The jurisdiction of the Tribunal arises under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (Act IV of 1936) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). So far as it appears from the police charge- sheet dated the 22nd February, 1953, as printed in the record before us, there is a statement therein to the effect "Suraj Pal Singh and Ram Manohar were armed with pistols". Such a narrow construction would rob the machinery of the Act of a great deal of its utility and would confine its application to cases which are not Advocates likely to arise often, in a wellordered administration like the Railways.

Of course, there is no proof, in this case, of any of the allegations in that report. 10 had been wrongly deducted by authority responsible for the payment of wages that is to say, that the deductions could not come under any one of the categories laid down in Advocates section 7 (2), that a would be a straight case within the purview of the Act and the authority appointed under section 15 could entertain the dispute. This may well be claimed to be the conduct of an innocent person.

The judgment of my learned brothers in this case apparently recognizes the jurisdiction of the Tribunal as above stated, when it said that the Tribunal has the power "to find out what the terms of the contract were to determine what the wages of the employed person were". In the Notice, the estimated cost of the project was shown to be ? 100 per month and that Rs. Even a Tribunal of limited jurisdiction, like the one under consideration, must necessarily have the jurisdiction to decide, for itself, the preliminary facts on which the claim or dispute before it depends.

In our opinion, the scheme of the Act as set forth above shows that if an employee were to state that his wages were, say Rs. The Nagar Nigam, Meerut, published a Notice dated May 26, 2010 inviting tenders of Request for Qualification (RFQ) for establishment of a new modern slaughter house at village Ghosipur, Meerut on Build-Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis. Indeed, I do not gather that such a construction was pressed for, before us, in the arguments.

The police constable mohair of the police station where the counter complaint, Ex. P- 16, was filed by Ram Pal the present appellant Suraj Pal had also accompanied Ram Pal, the complainant therein. In the instant case, it must have jurisdiction to decide what the wages payable are and, for that purpose, what the contract of employment and the terms thereof are. But it appears from the order of commitment in this case (which forms part of the present printed record) that with reference to that report there was pending, at the date of the committal, a cross-case against some of the prosecution witnesses in the present case for the same incident.

Whether the Tribunal's decision in this behalf is conclusive or not is a matter that does not arise for decision in this case. 5 is extracted hereunder : Before dilating further it is appropriate to take note of clause 16. However limited this jurisdiction of the Tribunal, and however elaborate the provisions in the Act for the preparation and display by the employer of the table of wages payable to the employees, and for the inspection thereof by the Factory Inspectors, it cannot be supposed Advocates that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is only to enforce the wages so displayed or otherwise admitted.