Sri Ramesh S/O Ranojirao Dongare vs The Secretary To Government on 13 March, 2008

Eh" "i""ir'5 H'i'fii i'.'=I'5iJ'fi'i" CDT KKKTKTIKR LT BANGALORE" 

DATED THIS THE 13th DAY or MARCH.  V  

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE SIIBHASH      V

RY!' ' o "1  

EEN:

Sri Ramesh S/o Ranojirao,
Demure

o'--'*3

Aged around 50 years.

n 
Gee: Busmess, V - -- '

Prop. Dongam and Ca-mp_eny,L
:'v'o.1833,   . A 
R/o 5900]F,  J   
3"' Cross. S.V.Colo:oy;--  
Tilakwadi.  'fl:  "

  ":Bysfi;;Iagé&:§_h "Paul. Adv.)
1;   to Govgmiinént.

'  91' Labpur,

 -- T14: Cgflgsioaer lb!' !.-.-;.l'-.9-.31' and

1:1:

Worlu1ien's-- Compensation Court,

J ' ' '.--L-um-3; II'... I [).\.I.-..-........
.  Sflib-Dfv'1fI.spu nun, Dclguum.

': .__;:s.._"1"h£ Scfiior Labour inspector,

__C'¢i1i:.'-le"--'i; Belgaum.
 % .... RESPONDENTS

(By Sridagadeesh Mund-argi, GA)

PETITIONER

A1″..it:hs 226 anti 227-~.oi’

the Constitution of India. playing to stay the executimi,
owraficn and *” ‘* 4*
order passed by the second

‘!’…..11iI==| ‘.5.-Tit %*..’i’@.’.’. i 2 under

This Petition coming on for Prly.

..uz’f m……..nfle the fcllcwing:

u

cnnnnK_ _ ‘%y
The order dated 21.2.2007 bythe

the Minimum Wages Act,

2. The 31-” mspozitlent found that

‘the petzitionef to an employee

working under on suo-mote inspectirn

1’3P°1’t. notice, was V ” as to why fine

pelt-.gs el–….:;’~.l.d not ‘-§ts.,..-” against % an-ti thereof’–r

be-ff’ on. Authority under_ the

Wages and notice has been sent to the

absent and ex-parte order was
petitioner to pay Rs.28.873-/– by way of the

V A 2 wages along with penalty, in all
poise. 2 2

counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per
‘B’, the notice alleged to have been served on

an runner pzoceedings pursuant to the impngnedy ._
, respondent – Authonfiirys _.__

.Hfia!i1;g

I

..4;11.200..5 and he has ‘produced the order sheet

.iI.”‘l’ifi6 and pointed out that. there is no reference

service’ of notice on the petitioner. nor is .

acknowledgement for having served

submits that, the impugned order is 7f

petitioner.

4. Learned Government” eleadcridfis disnute the fact
that, the order sheet does notdiscid of notice on

the petitioner.

5. if the cider ‘ ciples of natural
justice, the inbecoj order. Admittedly, the

petitioner is ” ‘cider sheet does not mention

anything of Even in the Annexure ‘B’- %

copy ~.notice showing the endorsement made by

gri, is no signature of the petitioner for

i eopy. In these cireunitenees; I he th…. th…

r”crd.er_ i_m_p1.1g.’n.efi.;. @,ui.res t he Hm–«hm.

6} Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned

quashed. The matter is remitted to the Minimum Wages

The Authority to hem e._ .a._q1.;_ir_v,r ….|*.e.

..!Hu., .1 no-…….. m the muwner.

/–

Sri Jagadeesh Mudatgi, learned Government

r.1i1.r-.=:etefl_ * *=-Ir – 9.4% .’..r the zeependents;

var -nun-an-w

mp]-