JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 6th October 1977 passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Jabalpur, exercising powers under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and further direction to prosecute the petitioner. ( 2. ) THE petitioner is a contractor who was extracting limestone from a quarry of which lease was granted by the Government. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the workers employed by the petitioner-contractor are not covered under Item 8 of the Schedule of the Minimum Wages Act and they are also not covered under the notification dated 9th October 1976 issued by the Central Government fixing the minimum wages for various categories of workers employed in mining operations, as according to the learned counsel this notification talks of stone mines but stone mines do not include limestone and on this basis it was contended that the order passed by respondent No. 3 and the subsequent proceedings of prosecution deserve to be quashed. According to the learned counsel, the notification talks of employed in employment in stone mines and other types of mines have also been indicated like Kyanite mines, steatite mines and in the steatite mines, it has been further clarified (including mines producing soap stone and talc ). Thus, according to the learned counsel, if this notification was intended to apply to limestones, it would have been clearly mentioned there. He further contended that as the petitioners workers were not covered by this notification, the order and the subsequent-proceedings deserve to be quashed. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on M. P. Mineral Industry Assocn. v. R. I. Commr. , AIR I960 SC 1068. and Labour inspector, Hyderabad v. C. S. and Co. , AIR 1972 SC 1177 . It was also contended that in spite of the fact that in these decisions their Lordships of the Supreme Court interpreted Item 8 of the Schedule which talked of. v. R. I. Commr. , AIR I960 SC 1068. and Labour inspector, Hyderabad v. C. S. and Co. , AIR 1972 SC 1177 . It was also contended that in spite of the fact that in these decisions their Lordships of the Supreme Court interpreted Item 8 of the Schedule which talked of. employment in stone breaking or stone crushing and it was held that such operation like the extraction of limestone will not be covered by Item 8 of the Schedule; and still in the notification issued under the Act in 1976, a similar language was used and, therefore, the only inference that could be drawn is that the Legislature accepted the interpretation put on this terminology in these decisions. In support of this contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on Keshvan v. State of Bombay, AIR 1951 SC 128 . and -Vajravelu v. Sp. Dy. Collector, AIR 1965 SC 1017 . ( 3. ) LEARNED counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the decisions of their Lordships on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner will be of no avail as the word "stone" has been used in a wider sense. He further contended that the words in this notification have to be construed in the light of the scheme of the law and the purpose for which this notification was issued. He, therefore, contended that the petitioners employees would be covered under this notification and the order passed by the respondent No. 3 and the subsequent proceedings are justified in law. Learned counsel also placed reliance on Ray Lime Stone Co. v. Sub-Div. Officers, AIR 1968 Pat. 39 . and contended that this decision clearly considered the interpretation of Item 8 of the Schedule under the Minimum Wages Act. It was also contended that the manner in which the words pertaining to stones have been enumerated in the notification, with a further clarification that it includes soap stone and talc, clearly goes to show that the intention of the Legislature was to use the word "stone" in the same sense in which it is commonly understood to mean all kinds of stones including limestone and no restrictive meaning could be given to this word "stone", in view of the scheme of the notification and the purpose of the Minimum Wages Act. ( 4. ( 4. ) ITEM 8 of the Schedule to the Minimum Wages Act reads: "8. Employment in stone breaking or stone crushing" it could not be disputed that the process of extraction of mineral like stone from any mine or quarry contemplates these two kinds of operations: (i) if it is a rock, it has to be broken; and (ii) if for further use it has to be made into small pieces, it has to be crushed. The phrase, therefore, used in this item is either stone breaking or stone crushing and it appears that this question came up for consideration before their Lordships of the Supreme Court in M. P. Mineral Industry Associations case (supra ). In this decision, their Lordships observed : "it is, however, urged by Mr. Umrigar, for the respondents, that the word "employment" as well as the word "stone" used in Item 8 should receive their widest denotation, and that, according to him, would include stone-breaking or stone-crushing operations carried on in mines. It is conceded that stone-breaking or stone-crushing operations have to be carried on in regard to work in manganese mines. Stones are beaten to small pieces by means of a hammer and they are washed and passed through sieves of different meshes before manganese is obtained. When the Schedule refers to the employment of stone-breaking or stone-crushing does it refer to the incidental stone-breaking or stone-crushing in connection with manganese mine operations? In a chemical or a geological sense stones may include manganese and that is one of the meanings given to the word in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary. On the other hand, the word "stone" as popularly understood in ordinary parlance particularly when it is coupled with the word "breaking" or "crushing" would exclude manganese. When we speak of stone-breaking or stone-crushing normally we refer to stone in the sense of "piece of rock" and that would exclude manganese. Employment in stone-breaking or stone-crushing in this sense would refer to quarry operations. Thus, whether or not the word "stone" should be understood in the wider sense or in a limited sense must depend upon the context in which the word is used. The intention which is reasonably deducible from the context would decide whether it is the expanded meaning or the limited meaning of the word that can be accepted. Thus, whether or not the word "stone" should be understood in the wider sense or in a limited sense must depend upon the context in which the word is used. The intention which is reasonably deducible from the context would decide whether it is the expanded meaning or the limited meaning of the word that can be accepted. The same consideration could apply to the denotation of the word "employment". We have carefully seen all the items in the Schedule and have taken into account the general beneficent policy of the Act but we are unable to hold that when item 8 refers to stone-breaking or stone-crushing it is intended to cover breaking or the crushing of stones incidental to the manganese mining operations. The context seems to exclude the "application of the wider meaning of the word "stone" used in item 8. Therefore, our conclusion is that the stone-breaking or stone-crushing operations which are carried on in mines are not included in item 8 in the Schedule; and if that be the true position the impugned notification issued by the State Government under section 5 (2) is ultra vires. " ( 5. ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner laid emphasis on the observation: "the context seems to exclude the application of the wider meaning of the word "stone" used in Item 8. In Labour Inspector, Hyderabads case (supra) the same item came up for consideration and in this decision reliance was placed on M. P. Mineral Industry Associations case (supra) in so far as the meaning of the word "stone" was concerned and the following passage from that judgment was quoted with approval: "the word "stone" as popularly understood in ordinary parlance particulary when it is coupled with the word "breaking" or "crushing" would exclude manganese. When we speak of stone-breaking or stone-crushing normally we refer to stone in the sense of "piece of rock" and that would exclude manganese. Employment in stone-breaking or stone-crushing in this sense would refer to quarry operation. " in construing the word "stone" in this decision in the dissenting judgment (delivered by Mathew, J.), the following passage from the decision of Patna high Court in Ray Lime Stone Co. v. Sub-Div. Officer (supra) was quoted with approval: "in other words, the contention was, if rock is broken to pieces by cutting with a sharp weapon, that would not involve "stone-breaking" or "stone-crushing". v. Sub-Div. Officer (supra) was quoted with approval: "in other words, the contention was, if rock is broken to pieces by cutting with a sharp weapon, that would not involve "stone-breaking" or "stone-crushing". This, I think, is too metaphysical a distinction to be imported in the construction of Item 8 of the Schedule. Looking at the object of the Act, I do not think that the distinction between cutting rock into pieces by a sharp instrument and breaking it into pieces by an instrument like a hammer, though fine from meticulous linguistic standpoint would be rational from the purposive approach. Both processes involve "stone-breaking". I agree with the High Court when it said. " ( 6. ) IT was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this interpretation put by their Lordships of the Supreme Court on the "stone-breaking" or "stone-crushing" and also on the words "stone" was there when the present notification was issued by the Central Government and, therefore, according to the learned counsel, it should be presumed that this notification was issued using the word "stone" in the same sense. ( 7. ) THE language used in the notification reads: "employed in employment in the stone mines, Kyanite mines, steatite mines (including mines producing soap stone and talc), ochre mines, asbestos mines and fire clay mines. " This language clearly shows that instead of using the phrase "stone-breaking or stone-crushing" it was thought fit to use the phrase "employed in the employment in stone mines etc. etc. " and it is also significant that instead of using the word "stone" alone in this notification, it is stated "stone mines, kyanite mines, steatite mines (including mines producing soap stone and talc) etc. etc. " Kyanite mines, steatite mines, apparently, are various technical names of the different kinds of stones. It appears that an attempt has been made to describe the different types of stones which are extracted from mines and further clarification has been added with steatite mines indicating inclusion of soap stone and talc. This kind of phraseology employed clearly goes to show that the intention was not to give restricted meaning to the word "stone" but what was thought was to give a wider meaning to the word and wherever any doubt existed, it was clarified by saying including etc. etc. This kind of phraseology employed clearly goes to show that the intention was not to give restricted meaning to the word "stone" but what was thought was to give a wider meaning to the word and wherever any doubt existed, it was clarified by saying including etc. etc. This nature of terminology employed in this notification, in my opinion, explains the use of the word "stone" in Item 8 of the Schedule of the Minimum wages Act, which was considered by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the decisions quoted above. The terminology used in Item 8 of the Schedule of the Minimum Wages Act and the notification dated 9th October 1976 issued under the Minimum Wages Act, clearly go to show that the term "stone" has been used in a wider sense meaning all kinds of stones. ( 8. ) IT was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the word "stone" used will not include "limestone" and the word "stone" should be interpreted on the basis of its meaning in ordinary parlance i. e. the dictionary meaning of the word. In Item 8 of the Schedule of the Minimum Wages act, the word "stone" only was used whereas in the impugned notification, the word "stone" alone has not been used but "steatite", "kyanite" have also been used with stone and with "steatite" it was further been explained to include "soap stone" and "talc". A perusal of the meaning of these words "kyanite" and "steatite", which are technical terms, will go to show that they are different types of stones having different mineral potential and chemical formations. In the Oxford English Dictionary, Vol. X, steatite has been explained to mean "a massive variety of talc, commonly of a grey or greyish green colour, with an unctuous or soapy feel; soap stone; some (precious stones) there by which bear the names of the body; as for example, hepatites, of the liver; of the sundry sorts of fat, grease or tallow; there is a white steatites, in the parish of Guenap, or a more indurated Earth than the former; there are several beds of steatites or rock-soap; a kind of stone composed of silex, iron and magnesia; also called French chalk. " Kyanite, in this Dictionary, Vol. V, has been stated to mean "variant of Cyanite" and and Cyanite, it appears, means ore of Aluminium. Kyanite, in Enclyolopaedia Britannica, Vol. " Kyanite, in this Dictionary, Vol. V, has been stated to mean "variant of Cyanite" and and Cyanite, it appears, means ore of Aluminium. Kyanite, in Enclyolopaedia Britannica, Vol. 13, has been described as : "kyanite is a rock-forming mineral composed of alumina and silica (Al203si03): It is a major source of mullite (q. v.), used in spark plugs and other refractory parclaircs. It crystallizes in the triclinic system and occurs in rocks as long, bladed crystals. Its colour ranges from graygreen to black to blue, with blue and blue-gray being the commonest colours. It has cleavage and is particularly marked by having a variable hardness. The hardness is approximately 4. 5 parallel to the length of the crystals (the C crystallographic axis) and 7 at right angles to it (parallel to the B crystallographic axis ). Specific gravity is 3. 6. Kyanite is one of the many phases in the system AL303si02 and can only form stably over a limited range of pressures and temperatures. It may be formed in the laboratory, and is presumably formed in nature, at pressures exceeding 4000-10,000 atmospheres, over the temperature range of from 400 to 800 C. At pressures below these, the stable phase is sillimanite. At low pressures, the minerals mullite and andalusite (q. v.) exit as stable phases. Kyanite is formed in nature by the metamorphism (q. v.) at high pressures of clay-rich sediments. It is an indicator of deep burial of a terrain and not of stress as it has been commonly supposed. Kyanite occurs principally in gneiss and in mica schist, and it is often accompanied by garnet quartz and micas. " The above definition of Kyanite goes to show that it includes even garnet and quartz; whereas steatite has been explained to mean : "talc occurs as a metamorphic mineral in veins, in foliated masses, and in certain rocks. It is often associated with serpentine, tremelite, forsterite, and almost always with carbonates (calcite, dolomite, or magnesite) in the lower metamorphic fades. It also occurs as an alteration product, as from tremolite or forsterite. It is often associated with serpentine, tremelite, forsterite, and almost always with carbonates (calcite, dolomite, or magnesite) in the lower metamorphic fades. It also occurs as an alteration product, as from tremolite or forsterite. Soap stones have two general types of occurrence: (I) intimately associated with metamorphosed, magnesium-rich carbons rocks, from which talc can form by the addition of water and silica and the release of carbon dioxide; and (2) intimately associated with extensively altered, olivine- rich and pyroxane- rich igneous rocks, from which talc can form when water and silica are added. A sequence of mineral formation in which talc is an end-member is very common. " This, therefore, clearly goes to show that stone as has been explained in this notification is all kinds of "stones", which are extracted from mines for different purposes and the persons employed are intended to be covered by this notification. The contention, therefore, that "stone" has been used in this notification with a restricted meaning cannot be accepted. ( 9. ) THE two decisions on which reliance was placed have interpreted the phrase "stone breaking or stone-crushing" and held that extracting manganese will not be covered because the breaking or crushing is an incidental process. The rock after being broken or crushed is not used as such or marketed as such and it was on this basis that in M. P. Mineral industry Associations case (supra) their Lordships held that in the case of extraction of manganese, Item 8 of the Schedule will not be applicable. Similarly, in Labour Inspector, Hyderabads case (supra) which was a case of extracting Shahabad stone and their Lordships felt that the quarrying of shahabad stone is not the same as scheduled employment of stone breaking or stone-crushing. The observations in this judgment: "in limestone, as in all stone, suitable stratified layers are commercially exploited for dimensional quarrying by a very skillful process. The product namely the slab after being polished is used for flooring, facing and the like. Quarrying of Shahabad stone with which we are concerned is of this type. The other kind of limestone that is to say, nonstratified limestone is suitable for being broken and crushed into smaller fragments and it has its commercial use in building construction, manufacture of cement and the like. Quarrying of Shahabad stone with which we are concerned is of this type. The other kind of limestone that is to say, nonstratified limestone is suitable for being broken and crushed into smaller fragments and it has its commercial use in building construction, manufacture of cement and the like. Stone breaking and stone crushing in relation to limestone is, therefore, that activity in which non-stratified limestone, recognised as rock is broken or crushed into irregular fragments or sizes and then marketed or otherwise used. The more valuable and rarer stratified limestone which is suitable for use as dimension stone is not the stone commercially exploited for breaking and crushing, "clearly go to show that when non-stratified limestone is extracted, it would fall within the ambit of Item 8 of the Schedule. Thus, these two decisions, do not lay down that the term "stone" used in Item 8 of the Schedule is used in a manner wherein limestone would not fall under that definition. ( 10. ) IT was stated that the limestone extracted in the mines at issue is not minor mineral as it is used for specific industrial use but even then, in the light of discussions above, it will not make any difference. ( 11. ) IN the light of the discussions above, therefore, the notification in question applies to the employees of the petitioner and in that view of the matter, the impugned order could not be said to be bad in law. As the order itself could not be challenged, the proceedings also could not be said to be illegal. ( 12. ) THE petition is accordingly dismissed. The contesting respondent shall be entitled to costs of this petition. Counsels fee Rs. 200, if certified. The outstanding amount of security, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition dismissed.