For Petitioner in both W.Ps. : Mr.N.C.Ashok Kumar For Respondent-1 in W.P.No.13756/2003 & for respondents 1 & 2 in W.P.No.34452/2003 : Mr.Su.Srinivasan, Assistant Solicitor General For respondents 2 & 3 in W.P.No.13756/2003 & for respondents 3 & 4 in W.P.No.34452/2003 : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan Special Government Pleader For respondent-4 in W.P.No.13756/2003 & for respondent-5 in W.P.No.34452/2003 : Mr.P.K.Dhilip Kumar COMMON ORDER The short point that falls for consideration is whether the action of the Labour Officers of the Central Government, calling upon the petitioner to pay minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1958 to the workers employed by the petitioner, is legal.
2. The factual matrix of the case is as under:
Admittedly, the petitioner is a Contractor under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and have been issued with Contract Labour Licence by the Government of Tamil Nadu vide Registration No.7/NLG. At the instance of the Government of Tamil Nadu, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board commenced construction of a power house at Masinagudi, known as Pykara Hydro Electric Project and floated tenders. The petitioner bagged one such tender for construction of access Tunnel, Tail Race, Pressure shaft, Power House cavern including transformer cavern, cable shaft, Adit etc., and entered into an agreement with the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board on 12.11.1996. Pursuant to the agreement, the petitioner commenced the work and while the work was in progress, the members of Anna Thozhilalar Sangam lodged a complaint with the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central Government), alleging that the petitioner was not paying minimum wages to the workers, who are members of their union. On receipt of the complaint, the first respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner dated 29.1.2003, for which the petitioner gave a reply dated 22.3.2003. Thereafter, the first respondent issued a letter dated 26.3.2003 to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to withhold the bills of the petitioner on the ground that claim cases have been filed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 before the authority. Based on the letter dated 26.3.2003, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board issued a communication dated 22.4.2003 to the petitioner, withholding their bills. Challenging the order dated 26.3.2003, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.13756 of 2003.
3. At the time of admission of W.P. No.13756 of 2003, this Court granted interim stay of the order dated 26.3.2003, on 29.4.2003.
4. While the order of stay was in operation, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) initiated proceedings against the petitioner under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, on the claim made by the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), challenging which, the petitioner has filed Writ Petition No.34452 of 2003.
5. Heard Mr.N.C.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Su.Srinivasan, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Central Government, Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned Special Government Pleader for the State Government and Mr.P.K.Dhilip Kumar for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. At the request of this Court, Mr.M.Kamalakannan, Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Chennai and Mr.R.Prakash, Labour Enforcement Officer, (Central) are present.
6. A counter has been filed on behalf of the first respondent, justifying the proceedings initiated by them.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Labour Officers appointed by the Central Government have no authority to initiate the impugned proceedings against the petitioner on the ground that the appropriate Government, in the instant case, is the State Government and not the Central Government.
8. Per contra, Mr.Su.Srinivasan, learned Assistant Solicitor General, justified the action on the ground that the activities of the petitioner would amount to "mining" and therefore, the Labour Officers of the Central Government have the jurisdiction to take action against the petitioner under the Minimum Wages Act.
9. This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions.
10. As stated above, the petitioner is a construction contractor under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, which is not an instrumentality of the Central Government. From the agreement dated 12.11.1996 entered between the petitioner and the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, it is beyond doubt that the petitioner has bagged the contract for making Tunnels connected with Pykara Hydro Electric Project launched by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.
11. It may be apposite to extract the definition of the expression appropriate Government under
Section 2(b) of the Minimum Wages Act:
"2. Interpretation:
(b) "appropriate Government" means..
(i) in relation to any scheduled employment carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government or a railway administration, or in relation to a mine, oilfield or major port, or any corporation established by a Central Act, the Central Government, and
(ii) in relation to any other scheduled employment, the State Government. The Act has a Schedule containing various employment activities for which the appropriate Government can fix the minimum wages.
12. A bare reading of
Section 2(b) of the Minimum Wages Act extracted above shows that if the employment listed in the Schedule is carried on either by the Central Government or under the authority of the Central Government or by a Railway Administration, then the Labour Officers appointed by the Central Government will have jurisdiction. Similarly, in respect of employment in mines, oilfield, major port or any corporation established by the Central Government, the Labour Officer of the Central Government will have jurisdiction.
13. Mr.Su.Srinivasan, learned Assistant Solicitor General attempted to bring the activities of the petitioner within the meaning of the word, "mine" used in
Section 2(b) of the Act and sought to justify the action initiated by the Labour Officers of the Central Government.
14. This Court is unable to agree with the submissions of Mr.Su.Srinivasan for the following reasons:
14.1 In the absence of definition of the word mine in the Minimum Wages Act, we can profitably draw inspiration from the definition of the word mine in
Section 2(j) of the Mines Act, 1952 and also the definition of the expression mining operations in Section 3(d) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, for the purpose of deciding whether the activities that were carried on by the petitioner would amount to mining operations.
14.2
Section 2(j) of the Mines Act reads as under:
2(j) minemeans any excavation where any operation for the purpose of searching for or obtaining minerals has been or is being carried on and includes:
i all borings, bore holes, oil wells and accessory crude conditioning plants, including the pipe conveying mineral oil within the oilfields.
ii all shafts, in or adjacent to and belonging to a mine, whether in the course of being sunk or not;
iii all levels and inclined planes in the course of being driven;
iv all open cast working v all conveyors or aerial ropeways provided for the bringing into or removal from a mine of minerals or other articles or for the removal of refuse therefrom;
vi all adits, levels planes, machinery, works, railways, tramways and sidings in or adjacent to a mine;
vii all protective works being carried out in or adjacent to a mine;
viii all workshops and stores situated within the precincts of a mine and under the same management and used primarily for the purposes connected with that mine or a number of mines under the same management ix all power stations, transformer sub-stations, convertor stations, rectifier stations and accumulator storage stations for supplying electricity solely or mainly for the purpose of working the mine or a number of mines under the same management;
x any premises for the time being used for depositing sand or other material for use in a mine or for depositing refuse from a mine or in which any operations in connection with such sand, refuse or other material is being carried on, being premises exclusively occupied by the owner of the mine;
xi any premises in or adjacent to and belonging to a mine on which any process ancillary to the getting, dressing or preparation for sale of minerals or of coke is being carried on. 14.3 Section 3(d) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, reads as under:
mining operations" means any operations undertaken for the purpose of winning any mineral. 14.4 This Court is not able to fit in the tunneling activities carried on by the petitioner for the Pykara Hydro Electric Project in any of the activities set down in the two definitions extracted above. The petitioner had carried out tunneling work for the purpose of providing access and connectivity for implementing Pykara Hydro Electric Project and not for winning minerals. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, can the activities of the petitioner be classified as mining operations for conferring jurisdiction on the Labour Officers of the Central Government to initiate action under the Minimum Wages Act. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings in both the writ petitions are set aside.
In the result, both writ petitions are allowed as prayed for. This Court places on record, its appreciation to Mr.M.Kamalakannan, Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Chennai and Mr.R.Prakash, Labour Enforcement Officer, Chennai for the assistance rendered by them. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
14.02.2017 Index:Yes/No ajr/cad P.N.PRAKASH, J.
ajr/cad To
1. The Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) 277-D, GPIC Building II floor, Sathy Road, Ganapathy, Coimbatore
2. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Coonoor, The Nilgiris
3. Deputy Commissioner of Labour Coonoor, The Nilgiris
4. The Chief Engineer T.N.E.B. Pushep site Masinaguri, The Nilgiris 643 223
5. The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Chennai and Authority under
Section 20(1) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 "Sastri Bhavan"
Haddows Road, Chennai 600 006
6. The Superintending Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Civil Division N.P.K.R.R.Maligai, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002 W.P.Nos.13756 and 34452 of 2003 14.02.2017