In the court of Assistant Labour Commissioner
District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh
Payment of Wages Act, 1936
Case number-P.W./01/2022
Prayer-Notice issued through letter
number- 78-80 dated 27-01-2022 against Sudarshan Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya and
Sandeep Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya is ultra vires to Payment of Wages Act, 1936
therefore liable to be quashed because based on the concealed and false facts
of the case.
Short submissions of the notice
receivers are as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon'ble
Sir that
Object of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936
The
Payment of Wages Act regulates the payment of wages to certain classes of
persons employed in industry and its importance cannot be under-estimated. The
Act guarantees payment of wages on time and without any deductions except those
authorised under the Act. The Act provides for the responsibility for payment
of wages, fixation of wage period, time and mode of payment of wages,
permissible deduction as also casts upon the employer a duty to seek the
approval of the Government for the acts and permission for which fines may be
imposed by him and also sealing of the fines, and also for a machinery to hear
and decide complaints regarding the deduction from wages or in delay in payment
of wages, penalty for malicious and vexatious claims. The Act does not apply to
persons whose wage is Rs. 24,000/- or more per month. The Act also provides to
the effect that a worker cannot contract out of any right conferred upon him
under the Act.
This
implies that Payment of Wages Act, 1936 deals with the dispute between employer
and employees but not between a contractor and a common man who had given
contract to construct house to contractor Yakoob Ansari S/O Siddik Mia who is
plaintiff number 1 in the aforementioned plaint. Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Siddik
Mia itself accepted in the complaint dated 07 June 2021 that he used to take
contracts of the construction of houses. This implies that he is a contractor
and others i.e. from plaintiff number 3 to 6 are the workers employed by
contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Siddik Mia. We notice receivers Sudarshan Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya and
Sandeep Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya do not know plaintiff number 3 to 6.
Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take the
perusal of annexure 1.
2-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that
under section 10 Payment of Wages Act, 1936
DEDUCTIONS
FOR DAMAGE OR LOSS. [Sec 10] Employer should give an opportunity to the
employee to explain the reason and cause for the damage or loss happened and
deductions made by employer from the employee wage should not exceed the value
or amount of damage or loss made by the employee.
3-It is submitted before the Hon'ble
Sir that Sudarshan Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya is the defendant 1 served the
notice to Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia and his son Farook Ansari
S/O Yakoob Ansari to pay detriment occurred to defendant Rs.803885.00 because
of the dereliction of the contractor. Aforementioned still not compensated the
loss but trying to deviate from real issue through aforementioned notice.
Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take the perusal of annexure 2.
4-I pray before the
Hon'ble Sir that In the aforementioned matter when brought up before the police,
police took the recourse that they are not technical expert so the
investigation is not feasible by the police unless a technical expert may
provide its report. For the enquiry by a technical expert, chauki in-charge
Bali Maurya forwarded the matter to the executive officer municipality Mirzapur
city and a thorough enquiry was carried out by the engineer municipality
Mirzapur city and enquiry report dated-31/08/2021 letter number-194 was
submitted before executive officer, municipality Mirzapur city. Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take a
glance of annexure 3.
5-It is submitted before the Hon'ble
Sir that executive officer municipality Mirzapur city submitted aforementioned
report under his sign on 09-09-2021 bearing letter number 210 before in-charge,
mandi samiti , Kotwali Katra, District-Mirzapur. No action has been taken by
police still and they suggested defendant to seek remedy under civil procedure.
When police had not to take any action
in the matter then why they troubled city engineer and executive officer
Municipality Mirzapur or police expected from engineers that they will also
speak the language of wrongdoer contractors like police. Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take a
glance of annexure 4.
6-I pray
before the Hon'ble Sir that more than two dozen reports of the police is
stating that
Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia is
a contractor and Yakoob Ali Ansari itself submitted complaint dated 07 June
2021 that he used to take contracts of the construction of houses. But it is
unfortunate that you Hon'ble Sir accepted his concocted story based on flimsy
ground even when the matter is not amenable under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 as he is not labour but
actually employer caused damages to the defendants because of his dereliction
quite obvious from engineers reports as mentioned.
Undoubtedly we will accept your conciliatory steps if
damages may be compensated by the contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari as plaintiff 1 in the case. Circle officer Prabhat Ray
submitted his report dated 08/02/2022 is attached as annexure 5 to this
communication cum submissions.
The concept of Rule of Law is that the state is governed, not by the
ruler or the nominated representatives of the people but by the law.
Hon'ble Sir please save defendants and curb blatant misuse of power and
promote rule of law. For this applicant shall ever pray you, Hon'ble Sir.
I swear in the name of that entire entries made here are true to best of
my knowledge if any thing found wrong, then action may be taken against oath
taker.
Date-14/02/2022 Affidavit cum
Oath taker
Sandeep
Maurya
S/O Brijlal Maurya Mobile number-9125959796,
Address-Sohta Adda, Jangi Road, District-Mirzapur, PIN Code-231001
Undoubtedly we will accept your conciliatory steps if damages may be compensated by the contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari as plaintiff 1 in the case. Circle officer Prabhat Ray submitted his report dated 08/02/2022 is attached as annexure 5 to this communication cum submissions.
ReplyDeleteThe concept of Rule of Law is that the state is governed, not by the ruler or the nominated representatives of the people but by the law.
Everyone knows that in this largest democracy in the world justice is sold in the hand of corruption which is quite obvious from the blatant abuse of power provided under the constitution of India by the concerned quasi judicial officer who isued arbitrary notices to the opposition without going into the merit of the case.
ReplyDeleteDEDUCTIONS FOR DAMAGE OR LOSS. [Sec 10] Employer should give an opportunity to the employee to explain the reason and cause for the damage or loss happened and deductions made by employer from the employee wage should not exceed the value or amount of damage or loss made by the employee.
ReplyDeleteHon'ble Sir more than two dozen reports of the police is stating that
ReplyDeleteYakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia is a contractor and Yakoob Ali Ansari itself submitted complaint dated 07 June 2021 that he used to take contracts of the construction of houses. But it is unfortunate that you Hon'ble Sir accepted his concocted story based on flimsy ground even when the matter is not amenable under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 as he is not labour but actually employer caused damages to the defendants because of his dereliction quite obvious from engineers reports as mentioned.