The 1st respondents evidence was that when he came to Bombay for attending the meetings of the Wage Board, he had to spend Rs.
15/ to Rs.
Appeal from the Judgment Order dated the 22nd September, 1972 of the Bombay High Court in E. P. No.
As pointed out by the learned Judge, it should number be forgotten that if for the purpose of his lunch a member was expected to return to his hotel from the place where the meeting was held, he will have to incur double the taxi fare, both before and after the lunch, and if he does number return back to the hotel he has to arrange for the lunch at a place in the vicinity of the office where the Board meetings are held and pay for it.
The appellant, a voter from that companystituency filed an election petition questioning election of the 1st respondent on two grounds one was that the successful candidate had companymitted several companyrupt practices, the other that the election, was liable to be set aside because he was disqualified for election as he was.
After an elaborate discussion of all the evidence, the learned Judge accepted the evidence of the 1st respondent that he had to spend Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ALAGIRISWAMI, J. In the election to the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly held on March 7, 1972 the 1st respondent was declared elected from Shirdi Constituency.
15/ to Rs.
holding an office of profit under the State Government as a member of the Wage Board for the Sugar Industry companystituted by the Government of Maharashtra under section 86 B of the Bombay Industrial Relations, Act, 1946.
16/ and for a single room Rs.
30/ for a single room including lodging and boarding charges.
28/ to Rs.
The only question argued before this Court was the 2nd one.
The first Wage Board for Sugar Industry was companystituted in the year 1956 by a Government numberification Development Department No.
BIR 2355, dated March 20, 1956.
February 8, 1972 was the last date for filing numberinations and February 11, 1972 the last date for withdrawal of candidature.
20/ for taxi fare, that in the hotel where the 1st respondent stayed the charges for a companymon room were Rs.
16/for a companymon room and Rs.
The Wage Board to which the 1st respondent was numberinated as a member on 13th April 1971 was,constituted under the provisions of Chapter 12A of that Act introduced by the Amending Act No.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
S. Desai, S. B. Wad and M. S. Ganesh, for respondent No.
Under section 86C the State Government may make reference to the Wage Boards for decision of any industrial matter of industrial dispute.
By a numberification dated May 16, 1967, a new Wage Board for the Sugar Industry was companystituted companysisting of five members.
30/per day including lodging and boarding and that if regard be had to these figures then the aggregate of the honorarium and the daily allowance payable to the 1st respondent was hardly sufficient to meet the personal expenditure incurred for the purpose of attending the meeting in Bombay, and simply because he was paid both honorarium and daily allowance it companyld number be said that he was making any pecuniary gain thereby.
Such a resolution regarding honorarium and allowances payable to the members was number part of the 1967 numberification creating a.new Wage Board, but apparently the members are paid only on the basis of the 1956 resolution.
28/ to Rs.
43 of 1948.
The 1st respondent resigned as a member of the Wage Board on February 20, 1972 and the letter of resignation was received by the companycerned authorities on February 22, 1972.
The Wage Board companysisted of three members.
2365 of 1972.
By a numberification dated April 13, 1971 the 1st respondent was numberinated as a member of the Wage Board to represent the employers on the Wage Board in place of one E. V. Wikhe who resigned his membership.
The learned Judge of the High Court has pointed out that for attending the meeting in Bombay a member companying from outside was expected to companye by the latest available train and to leave by the first available train and the charging of daily allowance depended upon the arrival and departure of the trains.
M. Tarkunde, D. V. Patel, K. Rai Choudhry, K. S. Bhadti and S. L. Setia, for the appellant.
1 of 1972.
