ORDER S.N. Dwivedi, J. - The petitioner deals in hand-made bidis. It is stated that it supplies tobacco to independent contractors. that they give tobacco to the bidi rollers who roll the bidis. and that thereafter the contractor delivers the rolled bidis to it. 2. The minimum wage of the bidi makers is fixed by a notification of the State Government issued under Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The notification was issued on February 18, 1969. After fixing the minimum wage of various kinds of employees the notification goes on to make three clarifications. We are concerned with one of them. It is incorporated in clause (b). It reads: "No deduction shall be made by the employer on account of supply of raw-materials of all of which have to be supplied by him free of cost to the bidi maker." The petitioner prays that clause (b) of the notification should be quashed. The argument is that under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, the State Government may issue a notification fixing the minimum wage: it cannot prohibit deductions from the minimum wage in that notification. Clause (b) accordingly goes beyond the power of the State Government under Section 3. 3. Clause (b) consists of two parts: (1) no deductions shall be made by the employer on account of supply of raw-materials; (2) raw-materials have to be supplied by him free of cost to the bidi makers. I shall first consider the validity of the first part. It is true that the first part is not covered by Section 3. But it is protected by Section 12 (1). Section 12 (1) provides that where a minimum wage is fixed, the employer shall pay to every employee the wage so fixed "any without deductions except as may be fixed within such time and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed." So Section 12 prohibits any deductions from the minimum wage except the deductions authorised by the appropriate authority. Section 12 is patterned on Section 7 of the Payment of Wages Act with this difference that while Section 7 itself enumerates the permissible deductions. Section 12 enables an appropriate authority to enumerate them. It has not been brought to my notice that the appropriate authority has permitted any deductions in respect of the raw-materials to be made from the minimum wage. Section 12 enables an appropriate authority to enumerate them. It has not been brought to my notice that the appropriate authority has permitted any deductions in respect of the raw-materials to be made from the minimum wage. As such a deduction is not permitted by the appropriate authority. Section 12 will apply to the instant case. No deduction can be made by the petitioner from the minimum wage of its employees on account of the supply of raw-materials. 4. The first part of the impugned clause (b) reiterates the prohibition enacted in Section 12 and does no more. Accordingly it is not invalid. The second part seems to me to go beyond Section 3. It enacts the reality. In practice the employer supplies raw-materials to the employee free of cost because he gets back the supplied raw-materials in the form of bidies. However as it goes beyond Section 3. I will hold it as invalid. 5. In support of his argument counsel for the petitioner has relied on Bidi Leaves and Tobacco Merchant's Association. Gondia v. The State of Bombay (A.I.R. 1962 SC 496). But the notification impugned there is radically different. That notification attempted to provide for a scheme of adjudication of the dispute between the employer and the employee with respect of chatt or bad bidies Reliance is also placed on the decision of brother Gulati. J. in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2757 of 1969 D/- 5-11-1970 (All). But the provisions of Section 12 were not brought to the notice of my aid brother. 6. In view of the foregoing discussions. the petition is partly allowed. The second part of clause (b) of the notification, which reads: "all of which have to be supplied by him free of cost to the bidi maker" is held invalid and inoperative. The rest of clause (b) is valid and operative. There shall be no order as to costs.