- (1.)The six cases are disposed of by a common judgment since acommon question of fact and law arises for decision.
(2.)All the Respondents are either work Inspectors or Maistries, work charged employees, working within the jurisdiction of the Petitioner. On July 16, 1980, the laid applications Under Section 15 (2) of the Payment of Wages Act (Act No. IV of 1936), for short, "the Act", complaining that the Petitioner has deducted wages contrary to the Provisions of the Act and sought direction for its payment together with compensation under subsection (3) thereof. The Authority under the Act allowed the applications on December 30, 1982 and directed the Respondent to pay Rs. 4 lakhs together with two times of compensation i.e., Rs. 8 lakhs. On appeal Under Section 17 of the Act, the District Judge, Anantapur confirmed the same. Thus, these revisions Under Section 115 C.P.C.
(3.)At the outset, it is made clear that on and with effect from August, 21, 1975, by orders made in G.O. Ms. No. 442, Panchayat Raj, the services of all the work charged employees who have put in 10 years of services, were provincialised and their services were regularised, accordingly as Regular Government Servants The Government have issued G.O. Ms. No. 318 Dated February 11, 1961 fixing the minimum rates of wages Under Minimum Wages Act (XI of 1948) to the work-charged establishments. They were revised in G.O. Ms. No 178 Dated February 1, 1971. It is also not in dispute that the said minimum rates of wages were paid to the Respondents. The claim of the Respondents is that, in addition, the Government also were revising, from time to time, the dearness allowances and directions were given to pay the same to the Respondents as well. While paying the minimum rates of wages, it is the claim of the Respondents that the Petitioner illegally deducted the D.A. and the additional D.A. accorded by the Government and they are entitled for the same. They also enclosed a statement of their claims in respect of each of the Respondents, the dates from which they are entitled, payments made and the total amount due, etc. in the relevant columns. In the Counter Affidavit filed by the Petitioner, before the Authority under the Act, it is stated that the minimum rates of wages fixed under the above G.Os. are inclusive ot all allowances and the Petitioners are not entitled to the D.As. They never demanded for payment of the same. The Petitioner did not deduct it, much less illegally; therefore, the Respondents are not entitled to the difference of the wages. The primary authority found that in view of the orders issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 846, Panchayat Raj, Dated November 25, 1971 and G.O. Ms. No. 423, Panchayat Raj, Dated September 19, 1972, the Respondents are entitled to payment of the D. As. and the ad-hoc D. As. The contention that the Petitioner is not an establishment and the Respondent are not entitled to seek the benefit under the Act was also negatived. The further contention by the Petitioner that the Respondents never made a demand was also negatived holding that through the Union, the Respondents have been making the demands. The Learned District Judge also further held on appeal that the appeal is not maintainable by operation of Section 17 (1A) of the Act.