Holding

The direction to pay the wages within two weeks pending the Letters Patent Appeal is not warranted, but the direction to deposit the wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, stands.

Summary

The Supreme Court heard a civil appeal filed by the State of Jammu and Kashmir against an interim order of the High Court Division Bench that directed the State to deposit and pay the respondent's minimum wages for the period January 1992 to March 2006 within two weeks, pending a Letters Patent Appeal. The Court noted that the Letters Patent Appeal challenging the Single Judge's original directions was still pending, and therefore the order to pay the amount immediately was premature. However, the Court upheld the Division Bench's direction that the State must deposit the wages in accordance with the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and allowed additional time for compliance. The deposited amount was to be held with the Registrar General and invested in a short‑term fixed deposit, subject to the final outcome of the Letters Patent Appeal. The appeal was disposed of without costs, and the Supreme Court directed the High Court to dispose of the pending Letters Patent Appeal within three months.

Issues considered

Whether a High Court Division Bench can order immediate payment of pending minimum wages to a respondent while a Letters Patent Appeal challenging the original order is still pending.
Whether the direction to deposit the wages in accordance with the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, should be upheld.

Legislation cited

Minimum Wages Act, 1948

Subjects

Minimum Wages Actinterim orderLetters Patent Appealpayment of wagesstay of orderdeposit of wagesshort term fixed depositcivil appealSupreme Court

Judgment

ST ATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS. A
v.
ABDUL MAJID

JANUARY 5, 2007

[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND ALTAMAS KABIR, JJ.] B

Interim Order:

High Court-Single Judge in a writ peticion directing State
i
Government, inter alia, to pay wages of workman from a specified date- C
State filing a Letters Patent appeal challenging said order-Division
Bench by an interim order directing State Government to deposit the
money in terms of Minimum Wages Act and to pay the said amount to
respondent within two weeks-Held, direction of Division Bench to pay the
amount to respondent pending Letters Patent appeal is not warranted at
this stage-However, the direction to deposit the wages in accordance
D
with terms of Minimum Wages Act not interfered with and time granted for
the purpose-The amount so deposited shall be subject to final outcome
of Letters Patent appeal-Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

In a writ petition filed by respondent-workman, the Single Judge of E
the High Court directed the appellants, inter alia, to pay the respondents
minimum wages w.e.f. January 1992 at such rates as were prevalent from
time to time. The appellants filed a Letters Patent appeal, and the Division
Bench of the High Court by an interim order directed the appellants to
deposit the wages in accordance with the terms of Minimum Wages Act F
from January 1992 to March 2006 and to pay the said amount to the
respondents within two weeks. Aggrieved, the State Government filed the
instant appeal.

Disposing of the appeal, the Court
G
HELD: The direction of Division Bench of the High Court to pay the
amount to the respondent within two weeks pending disposal of the Letters
Patent Appeal is not warranted at this stage. However, the direction
requiring the State to deposit the wages of the respondent in accordance
with the terms of Minimum Wages Act from January, 1992 to March, 2006 H
213
214 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] I S.C.R.

A is not interfered with. Therefore, further time is given to the State by four l--
J

weeks to comply with the direction in regard to the deposit of the minimum
wages, which shall be subject to the final outcome of the Letters Patent
Appeal. On such deposit, the Registrar General is directed to invest the
same in a short term fixed deposit in a nationalized bank.
[Para 6) [215-E-H, 216-A)
B
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 65 ot:~007

From the interim Order dated 3.4.2006 of the High Court of Jammu and .,
Kashmir in LPA (SW) No. 81/2006, C.M.P. No. 53/2006. }
c AtlafH. Nayak, A.G., State of Jammu and Kashmir and Anis Suhrawardy
for the Appellants.

Vijay Kumar for the Respondent.

D The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. : Leave granted.

2. Heard Mr.Altaf H.Nayak, learned Advocate-General for the State of
Jammu & Kashmir and Mr.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent.
E
3. The appeal is directed against an interim order dt.03.04.2006 passed
by the High Court in LPA(SW) No.8112006 and CMP No.53/2006 arising out
ofSWP No.1513/2004.

F 4. The learned Single Judge of the High Court while disposing of the
Writ Petition filed by the respondent herein issued the following directions:-

"(I) pay to the petitioner minimum wages as payable under the
Minimum Wages Act w.e.f. January, 1992 at such rates as
were prevalent from time to time.
G
2. petitioner be considered for regularization as' class iv.

3. Petitioner be brought on regular establishment as helper/
class-IV whichever be the lowest post available on the regular
establishment of the department within a period of two months.
H
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR v. ABDUL MAJID [LAKSHMANAN, J.] 215

4. Non-observance of this direction within the stipulate"d period A
will amount to commission of contempt of court.

·Registrar Judicial shall place this file before this court on the expiry
of two months. Copy of this Order shall be furnished to Mrs.Neeru Goswami
•
- appearing for respondents for compliance."

5. Aggrieved against the said order, the State has preferred the Letters
B

Patent Appeal which was taken on file as LPA No.8112006. The State
challenged the correctness of the directions issued by the learned Single
Judge in the Letters Patent Appeal. Admittedly, the Letters· Patent Appeal
filed by the State is pending final disposal. In the meanwhile, the High Court C
directed the State to deposit the wages of the respondent in accordance with
the terms of Minimum Wages Act from January, 1992 to ending March, 2006
and pay this amount to the respondent within two weeks from 03.04.2006.
The court has also observed that subject to the above, direction Nos.3 and
4 of the learned Single Judge shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
Aggrieved by the said order, the state has preferred the above appeal in this
D
Court. This Court on 17.07.2006 issued notice on the Special Leave Petition
as also on the prayer for interim relief.

6. As noticed earlier, the Letters Patent Appeal is still pending in the
High Court. The State has questioned the correctness of the directions E
issued by the learned Single Judge in the Letters Patent Appeal. In the
meanwhile, the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court
directed the State to deposit the wages of the respondent in accordance with
the terms of Minimum Wages Act from January, 1992 to ending March, 2006
and pay the said amount to the respondent within two weeks from 03.04.2006. F
The said direction to pay the amount to the respondent within two weeks
pending disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal, in our opinion, is not
warranted at this stage. However, we are not inclined to set aside the
direction issued by the Division Bench directing the State to deposit the
wages of the respondent in accordance with the terms of Minimum Wages
Act from January, 1992 to ending March, 2006. Therefore, we give further G
time to the State by four weeks to comply with the direction in regard to the
deposit of the minimum wages. The said amount shall be deposited with
the Registrar General of the High. Court subject to the final outcome of the
Letters Patent Appeal. On such deposit, the Registrar General is directed
H
216 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 1 S.C.R.

A to invest the same in a short term fixed deposit in a nationalised bank.

7. We request the High Court to dispose of the Letters Patent Appeal
within three months from the date of receipt of this Order from this Court
or on production of the same by either party.
•
B 8. The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

RP. Appeal disposed of.

.(