In the court of Assistant Labour Commissioner District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh Payment of Wages Act, 1936
Case number-P.W./01/2022
Petitioner cum plaintiff/litigator -Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia, his son Farook Ansari S/O Yakoob Ansari and several others
Versus
Respondent cum defendant-Sudarshan Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya and Sandeep Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya
Prayer-Regarding submissions made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff before the Hon'ble court on 16 June 2022 in the aforementioned case/litigation/plaint.
Short submissions of the Sudarshan Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya and Sandeep Maurya S/O Brijlal Maurya are as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that learned counsel for the plaintiff addressed the defendants as employers which is a highly objectionable and baseless address. Only to say before a court without any authentic proof and supportive evidence is a substanceless fact with the sole intention to harass the defendants by instituting infructuous cases to waste the precious time of the court.
1-माननीय महोदय के समक्ष यह प्रस्तुत किया जाता है कि वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता ने प्रतिवादी को नियोक्ता के रूप में संबोधित किया जो एक अत्यधिक आपत्तिजनक और निराधार सम्बोधन है। बिना किसी प्रामाणिक सबूत और सहायक सबूत के केवल अदालत के सामने कहना एक सारहीन तथ्य है, जिसका एकमात्र उद्देश्य अदालत के कीमती समय को बर्बाद करने के लिए निरर्थक मामलों की स्थापना करके प्रतिवादियों को परेशान करना है।
2-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that more than two dozen communications exchanged from the public staff like additional S.P. , Circle Officer, Inspector and sub-inspectors in which the matter is bilateral and Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia is a contractor.
Moreover, Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia himself affirmed on 02 June 2021 in his own handwriting that he worked as a contractor for 25 years which is video recorded as well by the defendant.
2-मैं माननीय महोदय के समक्ष प्रार्थना करता हूं कि अतिरिक्त एसपी, सर्कल ऑफिसर, इंस्पेक्टर और सब-इंस्पेक्टर जैसे सार्वजनिक कर्मचारियों से दो दर्जन से अधिक संचार का आदान-प्रदान हुआ जिसमें मामला द्विपक्षीय है और याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक मिया है एक ठेकेदार। इसके अलावा, याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक मिया ने स्वयं 02 जून 2021 को अपने हाथ से लिखकर पुष्टि की कि उन्होंने 25 वर्षों तक ठेकेदार के रूप में काम किया है जो प्रतिवादी द्वारा रिकॉर्ड किया गया वीडियो भी है।
3-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that under point 2, defendant stated as follows
under section 10 Payment of Wages Act, 1936
DEDUCTIONS FOR DAMAGE OR LOSS. [Sec 10] Employers should give an opportunity to the employee to explain the reason and cause for the damage or loss that happened and deductions made by the employer from the employee's wage should not exceed the value or amount of damage or loss made by the employee.
This implies that the detriment that occurred to the defendant must be taken into account by the court. As far as learned counsel for the plaintiff is saying that no damage occurred to the defendant due to contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik Mia is baseless because in this matter police had managed to carry out an enquiry through technical expert to assess the damages. Please take the perusal of submissions 4 and 5 made during the reply of notices served to defendants and relevant documents as supportive evidence.
3-माननीय महोदय के समक्ष यह प्रस्तुत किया जाता है कि बिंदु 2 के तहत प्रतिवादी ने निम्नानुसार कहा है धारा 10 के तहत मजदूरी भुगतान अधिनियम, 1936 क्षति या हानि के लिए कटौती। [धारा 10] नियोक्ता को कर्मचारी को हुई क्षति या हानि का कारण और कारण समझाने का अवसर देना चाहिए और नियोक्ता द्वारा कर्मचारी वेतन से की गई कटौती कर्मचारी द्वारा किए गए नुकसान या नुकसान के मूल्य या राशि से अधिक नहीं होनी चाहिए। . इसका तात्पर्य यह है कि प्रतिवादी को हुए नुकसान को अदालत द्वारा ध्यान में रखा जाना चाहिए। जहां तक वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता का यह कहना है कि ठेकेदार याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक मिया के कारण प्रतिवादी को कोई नुकसान नहीं हुआ, निराधार है क्योंकि इस मामले में पुलिस ने नुकसान का आकलन करने के लिए तकनीकी विशेषज्ञ के माध्यम से जांच करने में कामयाबी हासिल की थी। कृपया प्रतिवादियों को दिए गए नोटिसों के उत्तर के दौरान किए गए सबमिशन 4 और 5 का अवलोकन करें और सहायक साक्ष्य के रूप में प्रासंगिक दस्तावेज़ लें।
4-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that under point 4, defendant stated as follows
I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that In the aforementioned matter when brought up before the police, the police took the recourse that they are not technical experts 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 the executive officer, municipality Mirzapur city. Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance at annexure 3.
This implies the aforementioned contents concerned with the working of the police and municipality of Mirzapur city. How can learned counsel for plaintiffs trace the ulterior designs of the defendant? Thus the allegations made by the learned counsel for plaintiffs is baseless and create undue pressure on defendants to shut their mouth.
इसका तात्पर्य उपरोक्त सामग्री पुलिस और नगर पालिका मिर्जापुर शहर के कामकाज से संबंधित है। वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता प्रतिवादी के गुप्त अभिकल्पों का पता कैसे लगा सकते हैं। इस प्रकार वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता द्वारा लगाए गए आरोप निराधार हैं और प्रतिवादियों पर मुंह बंद करने के लिए अनुचित दबाव पैदा कर रहे हैं
5-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that under point 5, the defendant stated as follows
It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that the executive officer of the municipality of Mirzapur city submitted the 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 the police still and they suggested the defendant seek remedy under the civil procedure. When the police had not to take any action in the matter then why they troubled the city engineer and executive officer of Municipality Mirzapur or did the police expect from engineers that they will also speak the language of wrongdoer contractors like the police. Hon'ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance at annexure 4.
Here the enquiry report of the municipality Mirzapur city proves that damages occurred to the defendants but the learned counsel for plaintiffs wrongly conclude that the allegations of the defendants are baseless and defendants are escaping from payment of illegal deduction to contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik.
For the kind information of the learned judge, police are escaping from the matter on the ground that the matter is of civil nature so police can not be instrumental in providing compensation to the defendants. Here the defendant is pressing the police to register a case of cheating against contractor Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik.
यहां नगर पालिका मिर्जापुर शहर की जांच रिपोर्ट साबित करती है कि प्रतिवादियों को नुकसान हुआ है, लेकिन वादी के विद्वान वकील ने गलत तरीके से निष्कर्ष निकाला है कि प्रतिवादियों के आरोप निराधार हैं और प्रतिवादी ठेकेदार याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक को अवैध कटौती के भुगतान से बच रहे हैं। विद्वान न्यायाधीश की जानकारी के लिए पुलिस इस आधार पर मामले से भाग रही है कि मामला दीवानी प्रकृति का है इसलिए प्रतिवादियों को मुआवजा प्रदान करने में पुलिस की भूमिका नहीं हो सकती है। इधर प्रतिवादी पुलिस पर ठेकेदार याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक के खिलाफ धोखाधड़ी का मामला दर्ज करने का दबाव बना रहा है
6-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that under point 6, defendant stated as follows
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 himself submitted a complaint dated 07 June 2021 that he used to take contracts for 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 the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 as he is not a labour but actually an employer who 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 submission.
The concept of the Rule of Law is that the state is governed, not by the ruler or the nominated representatives of the people but by the law.
This implies that the submissions of the defendants are based on the report of the police and Yakoob Ali Ansari himself submitted a complaint dated 07 June 2021 that he used to take contracts for the construction of houses. It is failed effort of the learned counsel for plaintiffs to prove Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik is not a contractor but a labourer only on paper not ground reality and concealed the genuine fact from the court to institute a frivolous case against the defendants consequently abused the process of the court, therefore, action must be taken against learned counsel for plaintiffs and plaintiffs also.
इसका मतलब यह है कि प्रतिवादियों की दलीलें पुलिस की रिपोर्ट पर आधारित हैं और याकूब अली अंसारी ने खुद 07 जून 2021 को शिकायत दर्ज कराई थी कि वह घरों के निर्माण के लिए ठेके लेते थे। वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता का यह साबित करने का असफल प्रयास है कि याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक एक ठेकेदार नहीं है, बल्कि एक मजदूर है केवल कागज पर जो जमीनी हकीकत नहीं है और प्रतिवादियों के खिलाफ एक तुच्छ मामला स्थापित करने के लिए अदालत से वास्तविक तथ्य को छुपाया जिसके परिणामस्वरूप अदालत की प्रक्रिया का दुरुपयोग किया गया। इसलिए वादी और वादी के विद्वान वकील के खिलाफ भी कार्रवाई की जानी चाहिए
7-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that entire submissions of the defendants are based on facts which may be checked by the Hon'ble court at any instant of time but the learned counsel for the plaintiff only submitted baseless facts and not a single authentic record submitted to support the false allegations made against defendants.
8-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that the matter of allegation made is not amenable before this court so keeps out of business.
9-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that damages occurred to the defendants proved by the report of the executive officer municipality Mirzapur city which must be compensated by Yakoob Ali Ansari S/O Mohammad Siddik.
10-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that learned counsel for the plaintiff is making ambiguous and absurd quotes.
11-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that The matter concerns the municipality of Mirzapur city and the concerned police.
12-I pray before the Hon'ble Sir that at the place of six points, learned counsel for the plaintiff gave an explanation under 12 points. But not a single piece of supportive evidence. Please direct the appropriate body to assess the damages as further proceeding.
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 that entire entries made here are true to the best of my knowledge if anything is found wrong, then action may be taken against the oath taker.
Date-23/06/2022 Affidavit cum Oath taker
Sudarshan Maurya and Sandeep Maurya
S/O Brijlal Maurya Mobile number-9125959796,
Address-Sohta Adda, Jangi Road, District-Mirzapur, PIN Code-231001
इसका तात्पर्य यह है कि प्रतिवादी को हुए नुकसान को अदालत द्वारा ध्यान में रखा जाना चाहिए। जहां तक वादी के विद्वान अधिवक्ता का यह कहना है कि ठेकेदार याकूब अली अंसारी पुत्र मोहम्मद सिद्दीक मिया के कारण प्रतिवादी को कोई नुकसान नहीं हुआ, निराधार है क्योंकि इस मामले में पुलिस ने नुकसान का आकलन करने के लिए तकनीकी विशेषज्ञ के माध्यम से जांच करने में कामयाबी हासिल की थी। कृपया प्रतिवादियों को दिए गए नोटिसों के उत्तर के दौरान किए गए सबमिशन 4 और 5 का अवलोकन करें और सहायक साक्ष्य के रूप में प्रासंगिक दस्तावेज़ लें।
ReplyDelete