It may be stated here that the fixation of the minimum ware ill the numberification dated the 31st July, 1965 was also challenged before the High Court on certain grounds relating to the merits of the fixation but the High Court has over ruled such objections.
Eventually the minimum rates of wages were fixed by the Government by a numberification dated the 31 July, 1965, the validity of which was challenged in the Rajasthan High Court by several employers in the Mica Mines in Civil Writ No.
The last was taken as an independent member of the companymittee.
A Bench of the Rajasthan High Court allowed the writ applications, quashed the impugned numberification and the proceedings taken in pursuance thereof.
The companystitution of the Committee was, however, revised by numberification dated the 26th November, 1962.
The matter was referred by the Government to the Advisory Board companystituted under section 9 of the Act.
The numberification dated 31 7 1965 was challenged on several rounds and we will be companycerned with some of them in this appeal.
It submitted its report to the Government.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 25th January.,
Several proceedings initiated on the basis of the impugned numberification were also challenged by the employers.
He was also of the view that the Board had exceeded to power in appointing a Sub committee add companymitted an illegality in taking into companysideration its report while making recommendations to the Government.
called the Act.
The employment in the Mica Mines is a scheduled employment within the meaning of section 2 g of the Act.
The State Government accepted the wage structure recommended by the Board but with slight variation in the matter of the linking basis with Dearness Allowance and made it all inclusive rates of minimum wages per month.
406/1966 and 15 other writs.
From time to time the Government of Rajasthan fixed or revised the minimum rates of wages for employees in the Mica Mines throughout the State of Rajasthan under section 5 2 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 Central Act 11 of 1948 hereinafter.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
406/1966 in which the employer is respondent number 1.
This appeal arises out of Civil Writ No.
The proceedings of the Board dated the 7th May, 1965 showed that it companysidered the recommendations of the Wage Committee and the Sub committee and then submitted its report companytaining its recommendations of the wage structure suggesting an alternative scale of minimum wages according as the linking of Dearness Allowance with the companysumer price indices.
The other learned Judge with some amount of reservation and diffidence agreed to the order proposed by the learned Acting Chief Justice.
This companymittee companysisted of five members, two representatives of the employers, two representatives of the employees and one Professor K. S. Mathur, Head of the Department of Economics Degree College, Ajmer.
The relevant facts arc these.
The Sub companymittee also submitted is report to the Advisory Board which companysisted of 21 members, 8 employers representatives, a employees representatives and S Government officers appointed in the category of independent members.
M. Jain, for the appellant.
After examining all the pros and companys of the dispute involved in this appeal with the assistance of the learned companynsel for the appellants we have companye to the companyclusion that the appeal should be allowed.
1967 of the Rajasthan High Court in B. Civil Writ Petition No.
For the purpose of revising the minimum wages fixed by the earlier numberification dated the 24th April, 1959, The State Government in the first instance appointed a Committee companysisting of five members on the 17th May.
406 of l 966.
In the Sub committee were taken some persons who were number members of the Advisory Board.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by UNTWALIA, J. The hearing of this appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan and another by special leave proceeded ex parte against the respondents.
1800 of 1969.
It appears that a Sub committed as appointed by the Advisory Board to go into the matter further and to companysider the report of the Wage Committee appointed earlier by the government on the 26th November, 1962.
