IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP No. 15333 of 2003(A)
1. DR.E.K.RAMACHANDRAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SMT.NASEEMA P.R., STAFF MES,
... Respondent
2. SMT.LILLY T.J., STAFF MES THYVALAPPIL
3. SMT.PHILOMINA A.N.,STAFF MES THYVALAPPIL
4. SMT.MARIYAM P.P., STAFF MES
5. SMT.KOMALAM K.R., STAFF NURSE,
6. SMT.LEKSHMI P.R., STAFF NURSE,
7. SMT MARY VINCENT, STAFF NURSE,
8. SMT AMMINI K.D., STAFF NURSE,
9. SMT.REENA V.O., STAFF NURSE,
10. THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN
For Respondent :SRI.MAJNU KOMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :05/01/2007
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
O.P. No. 15333 OF 2003 A
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2007
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, the opposite party in CP No.119/97 before the
Labour court, Ernakulam, challenges Ext.P1 order passed by the Labour
court in that CP. That CP was filed by respondents 1 to 9 claiming the
difference between the minimum wages payable to them and the actual
amount paid by the petitioner management. Although originally the
petitioner tried to make out a case that going by the appendix a wrong
notification under the Minimum Wages Act has been applied, in view of
the fact that in the body of the order, it is specifically mentioned that
what has been considered by the Labour court is the correct
Government Order namely, GO(MS) No.94/80/LBR dated 8.9.1980, it
cannot be disputed now that the said Government Order is the one
applicable and applied by the Labour court, in the present case.
Confronted with that position, the petitioner confines his prayer for
reducing the interest from 12% as ordered by the Labour court to a
reasonable percentage. I find that in the original petition, there was a
conditional stay and the condition has been complied with by the
petitioner also. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
OP.15333/03
2
case, I feel that justice would be met if the interest payable by the
petitioner is reduced from 12% to 6%. Accordingly, I dispose of the
original petition modifying Ext.P1 to the effect that the petitioner herein
would be liable to pay interest on the amount computed by the Labour
court at the rate of 6% per annum. The petitioner shall pay the balance
amount due as per Ext.P1 order with 6% interest within two months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE)
aks
S. SIRI JAGAN , J.
OP No.15333/03 T
J U D G M E N T
5th January, 2007