9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to the quashing of a clause in a notification related to minimum wages by the Orissa High Court. Analysis: The appeal before the Supreme Court challenged the judgment of the Orissa High Court that quashed a specific clause in a notification related to minimum wages issued by the Government of India. The High Court held that the authority issuing the notification lacked the statutory power to include the explanation in the notification, specifically Clause-(iii) of paragraph 7. The High Court emphasized the statutes related to mining activities and their relevance to the fixation of minimum wages. The Additional Solicitor General argued that the High Court overlooked crucial facts of the Act and stressed irrelevant statutes. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel contended that the impugned clause created a class of employees not recognized under any mining-related statute, questioning the sanctity of that part of the notification. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's judgment lacked sufficient reasoning to justify its conclusion. Despite referring to various statutes related to mining activities, the High Court did not provide a clear rationale for its view that the authority lacked statutory power to issue the notification. The Supreme Court criticized the cryptic nature of the High Court's judgment, highlighting the need for a reasoned order. The Supreme Court refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and directed the High Court to re-hear the writ petition with proper consideration of all relevant aspects. The Supreme Court clarified that the continuation of relief granted to the writ petitioners during the High Court proceedings should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the case's merits. Additionally, the Supreme Court mentioned the issuance of a similar notification in 2002, urging the High Court to consider its relevance if brought to its attention with appropriate pleadings. Finally, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of an early disposal of the writ petition due to its long pendency since 1994. In conclusion, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal without costs, directing the High Court to re-hear the writ petition with a reasoned order and considering all relevant aspects, including the disputed clause in the notification and any subsequent developments in similar notifications.
|
