Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Appropriate Government: (2b)
Appropriate Government: (2b)
Means
Employer: (2e)
and includes,
In a factory
in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed under this Act,
in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed under this Act,
the person or authority appointed by such Government for the supervision and
control of employees or
the person appointed by such authority for the supervision and control of
employees or
where no person is so appointed, the chief executive officer of the local authority;
in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed under this Act,
any person responsible to the owner for the supervision and control of the
employees or for the payment of wages;
Employee: (2i)
Means any person who is employed
for hire or reward to do any work,
skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical,
in a scheduled employment
in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed;
And includes
an out-worker;
an employee declared to be an employee by the appropriate Government;
But does not include any member of the Armed Forces
Part 2: Agriculture
Wages: (2h)
The constitutional validity of this Act was challenged before the court in various cases.
However, the judiciary played a critical role in determining that the Act was constitutionally
valid and it protects the interests of the workers so that they have access to food, shelter,
clothing, education, medical assistance, etc. The judiciary also stated that failure to pay below
the minimum wage rate amounts to forced labour.
The constitutional validity of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was first challenged in the
case, Bijay Cotton Mills Ltd. v. The State of Ajmer, 1954. In this case, there was an
industrial question between the industry and the workers regarding the improvement of
wages. The company alleged before the court that the provisions of the Act are illegal since it
puts unreasonable restrictions on the employer as he is deterred from resuming his trade or
business unless he is ready to pay the minimum wages to the workers. The rights of the
employees are also limited, as they are disabled from working in any trade or industry unless
the terms are agreed to between them and their employers. Therefore, the Act is violative
of Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution which guarantees freedom of trade and
business. However, the Supreme Court of India held that the provisions of the Act are not
unreasonable and permissible under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, moreover, the
provisions of the Act have been imposed for the benefit of the general public as the Directive
Principles of State Policy embodied under Article 43 of the Constitution.
Thus, it can be said that because of certain provisions of the Act the employers might find it
difficult to carry on or start a business, but it is done in order to protect the general interest of
the public and so the Act can not be deemed unreasonable or stuck down on such grounds.
Similarly, in the case Bhikusa Yamasa Kshatriya v. Sangamner Akola Bidi Kamgar Union,
1958, the Bombay High Court held that the constitution of the committees and the Advisory
Boards under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 did not contravene the statutory provisions of
the prescribed legislature and further on careful examination of the Act it was noticed that
Section 3(3)(iv) of the Act does not contravene Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution
neither does it violate equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Constitution.
Not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution
Furthermore, the Act is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution which states equality
before the law. It was brought into light by India’s Union Labour and Employment Minister
Shri Mallikarjuna Kharage that the variation of minimum wages of workers in different states
is due to the different socio-economic conditions, prices of commodities, paying capacity,
productivity, etc. which impacts the wage rate paid to the workers in a particular state. In the
case, N.M. Wadia Charitable Hospital v. State of Maharashtra, 1986, it was held by the
Bombay High Court that fixing different rates of minimum wages for different localities is
permitted under the Constitution and the labour laws of the country, thus fixing different rates
of minimum wages for different areas is not discriminatory and not violative of the
Constitution.
FIXATION OF MINIMUM RATE OF WAGES BY TIME RATE OR BY PIECE
RATE
SECTION 3
FOR PART II A.G. CAN FIX THE MINIMUM RATE OF WAGES FOR A
PART OF STATE
b) review at such intervals, as it may think fit, such intervals not exceeding five
years, the minimum rates of wages so fixed and revise the minimum rates, if
necessary.
Section 4:
Section 4 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 states that the minimum wages fixed by the
appropriate government must consist of:
2. The cost of living allowance and the cash value of the concessions in respect of
supplies of essential commodities must be computed by a competent authority and
at such intervals specified by the appropriate government.
Section 13:
Section 14:
Overtime
Where an employee, whose minimum rate of wages is fixed under this Act by the hour, by
the day or by such a longer wage-period as may be prescribed, works on any day in excess of
the number of hours constituting a normal working day, the employer shall pay him for every
hour or for part of an hour so worked in excess at the overtime rate fixed under this Act or
under any law of the appropriate Government for the time being in force, whichever is
higher.
Section 15:
Wages of worker who works for less than normal working day.
If an employee whose minimum rate of wages has been fixed under this Act by the day works
on any day on which he was employed for a period of less than the requisite number of hours
constituting a normal working day,
Section 5:
Procedure for fixing and revising minimum wages.
(1) In fixing minimum rates of wages in respect of any scheduled employment for the first
time under this Act or in revising minimum rates of wages so fixed, the appropriate
Government shall either
COMMITTEE METHOD:
The appropriate Government
NOTIFICATION METHOD:
The appropriate Government
Section 7:
SG shall appoint a State Advisory Board for co-coordinating the work of committees and
advising the appropriate Government in the matter of fixing and revising of MRW
It shall consist of
Section 8:
It shall consist of
persons to be nominated by the CG
representing employers and employees from scheduled employment who shall be
equal in number &
independent persons not exceeding 1/3rd of its total number of members,
To hear & decide the claims arising under this act (i.e. if there is a dispute b/w employer &
Employee regarding the rates of Wages)
The procedure before the authority in the matters relating to non-payment or payment of less
than the minimum wages to the employees shall take place in the following manner as
prescribed under the Act.
The prescribed authority shall give adequate opportunities of being heard to the
employer, applicant or any other person relevant to the case.
In case of non-payment of wages, or delay in the payment of wages the authority shall
direct the refund of such amount to the applicant of the amount unpaid, or delayed
along with the compensation for the damages suffered by the employee.
No compensation will be awarded to the employee if the authority is satisfied that the
delay in payment of wages of the employee was a bona fide error. The authorised
person was unable to make the payment even though they exercised due diligence.