JUDGMENT : R.C. Patnaik, J. - The petitioners in these writ applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seek invalidation of notifications (Annexure-U series) dated 30-6-1990 issued by the State Government u/s 5(2) read with Section 3(1)(6) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'; fixing the minimum wages payable to unskilled employees employed in 75 scheduled employments at Rs. 25/- per day as infracting Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the provisions contained in Section 3(1)(b) and Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 5 and Section 9 of the Act and Rules 15 and 16 of the Orissa Minimum Wages Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules") After stating the facts and submissions their Lordships held as follows: 8. The Act came to be enacted to give effect to the resolutions passed by the Minimum Wages Fixing Machinery Convention held at Geneva in 1928. The object of those resolutions as stated in Article 224 is to fix the minimum wages in industries in which no arrangements exist for the effective Regulation of wages by collective agreements or otherwise and wages are exceptionally low. Its main object is to prevent sweated labour as well as exploitation of unorganised labour. It proceeds on the basis that it is the duty of the State to see that at least minimum wages are paid to the employees irrespective of the capacity of the industry or unit to pay the same. The language of Article 43 of the Constitution is that the State should endeavour to secure by suitable legislation of economic organisation in any other way, to all workers agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage, conditions of work, ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities. The fixing of minimum wages is just the first step in that direction. In course of time the State has to take many more steps to implement that mandate. Minimum wage does not mean wage just sufficient for bare sustenance. At present the conception of a minimum wage is a wage which is somewhat intermediate of a wage which is just sufficient for bare sustenance and a fare wage. In course of time the State has to take many more steps to implement that mandate. Minimum wage does not mean wage just sufficient for bare sustenance. At present the conception of a minimum wage is a wage which is somewhat intermediate of a wage which is just sufficient for bare sustenance and a fare wage. That concept includes not only the wage sufficient to meet the bare sustenance of an employee and his family, it also includes expenses necessary for his other primary needs tax such as medicine expenses, expenses to meet some education for his children and to preserve his efficiency as a worker. The concept of minimum wage is likely to undergo a change with the growth of our economy and with the change in the standard of living. It is not a static concept. Its concommitants must necessarily increase with the progress of the society. It is likely to differ from place to place and from industry to industry. Since it is impossible for the legislature to undertake the tax of fixing minimum wages in respect any industry much less in respect of any employment, that proceeds must necessarily be left to the Government in charge of the administration of law State. The legislature has to determine the legislative a policy enumerated with sufficient clearness and formulate the same as a binding rule of conduct. The Government is charged with the duty of implementing that policy. The Government, to carry out affectively the purpose of the enactment, has to decide with reference to legal conditions whether it is desirable that minimum wages should be filed in regard to a particular grade or Industry in any locality. The power conferred on the Government is subordinate and for the purpose of carrying out the objects of the Act. 9. As a safeguard against exercise of uncontrolled or arbitrary power by the Government, the Legislature has by Section 4 laid down that the minimum rate of wages is to consist of and by Section 5, it has provided the procedure for fixing minimum wages by providing two modes for collecting the necessary data and information ; one is contained in Section 5(1)(a) and the other in Section 5(1)(b). In either case, it is merely a procedure for gathering the necessary data and information. In either case, it is merely a procedure for gathering the necessary data and information. Discretion to select any one of the procedures prescribed for collecting the data is left to the government. XX XX XX After discussing the points raised and it was held : Lest the authority entrusted to the Government be exercised in an uncontrolled and arbitrary manner, safeguards are built in Section 5 by requiring the Government to follow either of the modes prescribed in Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-Section (1) and where it chooses not to appoint any committee, to publish its proposal for information of persons likely to be affected thereby inviting objections and representations to the proposal and consider the advice of the Committee if the mode prescribed in Clause (a) is followed and to consider the representations and the advice of the Advisory Board if the mode prescribed in Clause (b) is followed. By way of further safeguard provision is made in Section 9 regulating the Constitution of the Committee and the Advisory Board so that the Committee or the Advisory Board renders advice independently and fairly. XX XX XX 15. In none of the reported cases decided by the High Courts, and the Supreme Court could we tome across a case where the Minister of State, Labour, was appointed as an independent member of the Board or the Committee. Nomination of Government officials as independent members not being per se invalid, challenge has to be considered on its own peculiar facts. Can the Minister of State, Labour, who has espoused the proposal, piloted the proposal, expressed categorical commitment to the proposal, be considered as an independent member ? Each member is expected to act fairly and independently in the matter of giving advice to the Government, The proposal was in respect of 79 scheduled employments, with many of which Government was directly associated. His advice might go against the employers having regard to his interest in the Government; and especially when he has already committed himself categorically, can he be called an independent member ? At this stage, we would refer to his involvement Which is gathered from the file relating to fixing of minimum wages that was produced by the learned Advocate-General. On 23-3-1990, he gave the following direction: " If the Chief Minister declared on the floor of the Assembly to fix up the minimum wages at Rs. At this stage, we would refer to his involvement Which is gathered from the file relating to fixing of minimum wages that was produced by the learned Advocate-General. On 23-3-1990, he gave the following direction: " If the Chief Minister declared on the floor of the Assembly to fix up the minimum wages at Rs. 25/-, so the minimum wage must be Rs. 26/-," (underlining supplied) That day the Chief Minister passed an order that minimum wages at the rate of Rs. 25 per day equal to male and females to be implemented from 1-4-90 and strict compliance should be assured. These two directions of the Minister of State, Labour, and the Chief Minister considerably disturb us while adjudging the matter. Hence, on this premise, we are of the view that the Minister of State, Labour, cannot be said to have the character of an independent member to fairly and independently advise the Government in the matter of fixation of minimum wages. 'Worse was his appointment as Chairman. 16. We are to consider the question if the nomination of Government officers as independent members was valid on the facts of each case without reference to the outcome. Justice must not only be done but must seem to be done. Appearance of impartiality being important, the member should not only act impartially but there must be appearance of it. It has been said "In truth, within the context of service to the community the appearance is the more important of the two. The Judge who gives the right Judgment while appearing not to do so may be thrice blessed in heaven, but on earth he is no use at alt" (lord Devlin in "The Judge") 17. Can the Secretary, Forest, Fisheries and Animal Husbandry Department, Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretary, Energy Department. Secretary. Works Department, who had large and various employments under them as would be evident from the fact that the employers-representatives nominated ware Chief Engineer, Roads, Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation, Managing Director, Orissa Forest Corporation, be considered as independent members ? 18. There were large number of Secretaries to Government and high officials unconnected with the employments who would be nominated as independent members so that the nominations should not only appear as independent, but no doubt could be entertained as to their independence and impartiality. 19. 18. There were large number of Secretaries to Government and high officials unconnected with the employments who would be nominated as independent members so that the nominations should not only appear as independent, but no doubt could be entertained as to their independence and impartiality. 19. Besides, when the Minister of State for Labour, who has already committed himself that the minimum wages must be fixed at As. 25/-per day has been appointed as the Chairman, theoretically it is possible to say that despite the fact the Minister was the Chairman and presided over the meeting, the Secretaries to Government were free to express their opinion freely and fairly. Toe theoro tical an approach in judicial pronouncements ignoring the ground realities has been responsible for may a baneful consequence. 20. We do not say that there are no independent fair-minded bureaucrats who would not be influenced or intimidated by the presence or the views of the Minister, but we cannot lose weight of and ignore reality. We should consider it from the point of appearance, not from how the Government officials acted or conducted themselves. Would any Secretary to the Government and especially the Secretary to the Government in the Labour Department express a view contrary to or opposed to the view of the Minister, Labour, knowing fully well that the Minister had already made a commitment and the Chief Minister had insisted on revision of minimum rate of wages to Rs. 25/- 7 Does the Secretary to Government directly involved with several employments as the ultimate employer responsible for making the payment of wages give art appearance of independent member so the employees in his employment 7 Nomination of independent members is provided u/s 9 with a view to balancing advice to be given by the representatives of the employers and the representatives of the employees. Does the nomination of Secretaries of Works Department, Irrigation Department, Forest, Fisheries and Animal Husbandry Department, who employed hundreds and thousands of employees in various employments under them, appear as nomination of independent members ? At the same time the Chief Engineer, Roads, Engineer in Chief, irrigation. Managing Director of the Orissa Forest Corporation weighed the scale in favour of the employer. In our opinion, this is a case to where the observation of the Supreme Court in The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. At the same time the Chief Engineer, Roads, Engineer in Chief, irrigation. Managing Director of the Orissa Forest Corporation weighed the scale in favour of the employer. In our opinion, this is a case to where the observation of the Supreme Court in The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Narayana Velur Beedi Manufacturing Factory and Others would be fully attracted, namely : "It may be that in certain circumstances such persons who are in the service of the government may cease to have an independent character if the question arises of fixation of minimum wages in a scheduled employment in which the appropriate government is directly interested." We are not of the view that these officers do not have the character of independent persons merely because they happen to be Government officials or Government servants. But, by reason of their direct interest in the employments concerned, they are not independent members. They are rather employers. They come in the category as representatives of employers but cannot be nominated as independent members. The aforesaid view is with reference to Section 9. We would consider later from a different angle-to what extent that nomination of Minister of State, Labour, as Member-Chairman and his presiding over the meeting vitiated the proceeding. 21. We would not take up for consideration, if the Advisory Board duly discharged the function and its duty and if it had taken a decision and if the recommendation was vitiated for non-compliance of the mandatory provision contained in the Rules, and if the recommendation was true and faithful communication of the decision of the Board. (emphasis applied) XX XX XX The proposal was for fixing minimum rates of wages for un-skilled employees in 79 establishments of the State covering almost whole of the employments and affecting scores of thousands of employers. Did the Advisory Board discharge its duty duly in a responsible manner ? It has been asserted in the rejoinder that representations 533 in number running into thousands of pages, which the Member-Secretary had received, were not circulated earlier amongst the members, not even during the course of the meeting. The minutes of the proceedings do not disclose that the 533 representations were placed before the Board. It has been asserted in the rejoinder that representations 533 in number running into thousands of pages, which the Member-Secretary had received, were not circulated earlier amongst the members, not even during the course of the meeting. The minutes of the proceedings do not disclose that the 533 representations were placed before the Board. The statement in the affidavit of the then President of the Utkal Chamber of Commerce and a member of the Advisory Board to the effect that the representations were not made available to the members has not been traversed by any person who was either a member of the Advisory Board. The best person to deny the assertion, if that was incorrect, and in fact the representations were made available to the members was the Member-Secretary of the Board. He has not filed any affidavit controverting the assertion made on behalf of the petitioners. The affidavit sworn to by the Deputy Secretary to the Government, in the Labour Department who has no personal knowledge about what happened in course of the meeting and whose knowledge and informations are based upon records is useless. There is, therefore, no traverse in law. If the representations running into more than a thousand pages were placed, rightly it has been urged that it would not have been humanely possible for the members to peruse and consider the same in course of a few hours. The fixing of minimum rates of wages or revision of minimum rates' of wages, as we have said, is of great moment for both the sectors. The Supreme Court in Kshatriya's case (supra) negatived the challenge to the authority conferred on the State Government as the enrolled and arbitrary, having regard to the provisions providing adequate safe-guards against any nasty or capricious decision and observed : xx xx 22. The Advisory Board did not itself constitute sub-committee of its own though one of the members had so suggested, to make survey for the purpose of collection of necessary data. Did it have the necessary informations before it ? Were the materials before it adequate to take a decision in the matter of such importance relating to 79 employments, a decision, if accepted by the Government might affect the employees or the employers. It is expected that the duty and responsibility cast on the Advisory Board should be discharged in a responsible manner. Were the materials before it adequate to take a decision in the matter of such importance relating to 79 employments, a decision, if accepted by the Government might affect the employees or the employers. It is expected that the duty and responsibility cast on the Advisory Board should be discharged in a responsible manner. The Board had before it no data or information nor did it direct a survey. The representations could have provided it with some information, some data. Those were not made available, as alleged by the petitioners. The minutes of the proceedings do not disclose that those were made available. The gist that has been filed contains a summary of few representations, out of the 533, hence the gist that was circulated was misleading. We do not say that in no situation deliberations for five hours would not be a equate but that would depend upon the facts and circumstances. If the members had an opportunity of going through the representations, 533 in number-one of the representations filed by the Utkal Chamber of Commerce and Industries, runs to about 20 pages prior to the deliberations they could have had some information, some material to take a decision. Hence, we are of the view that the Board had failed to duly discharge its function and responsibility so zealously entreested to it by the legislature as an adequate safeguard against arbitrary and capricious decision of the Government. In conclusion we say that the Advisory Board failed to discharge its function and did not take any decision. Hence, there was no valid recommendation/ advice and the recommendation was untrue, unfaithful and misleading. 28. The next question is : Did the Government decision conform to the requirement as enjoined by Section 5(2) ? From the few extracts we have made from the decisions of the Supreme Court, we have seen that the alternative mode of appointing an Advisory Board can be resorted to where the Government has in its possessions adequate data, enough materials for the purpose of fixing the minimum rate of wages or for revision thereof, from the record that has been made available to us, it appears that around March. 1990, the department took up the matter of revision of minimum rates of wages for unskilled employee. The last revision was made with effect from 1-2-1989. 1990, the department took up the matter of revision of minimum rates of wages for unskilled employee. The last revision was made with effect from 1-2-1989. The raised detre for the exercise was that the revision of minimum rate of wages should ordinarily be done within a duration of two years and there had been a rise in the consumer price index to the extent of 50 per cent or more since one date of previous revision. Since there had been rise in the consumer price index in respect of agricultural labourers and industrial workers, a further revision of minimum wages was justified and the revision was also necessary having regard to the minimum rate of wages for unskilled employees fixed in the neighbouring States and other States of the country and by the Central Government. The department was of the view that the minimum rate of wages for the unskilled labourers should be fixed or par with that fixed in Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Keral and Karnataka and suggested that the rate of Rs. 11/- should be revised to Rs. 15/- per day, while the matter was under consideration, the Chief Minister made an announcement on the floor of the Assembly whereupon the Minister of State for Labour vetoed the proposal of the department and observed that as the Chief Minister had declared on the floor of the Assembly to fix-up the minimum wage at Rs. 25/-, so the "minimum wage must be Rs. 25/-" and the Chief Minister directed that minimum wage at Rs. 25/- equal to males and females should be implemented from 1-4-1990 and for strict implementation the Chief Secretary was directed to work out the rate. This direction was given on 23-3-1990. Thereafter, as we have noted earlier, the proposal was notified and the Advisory Board was reconstituted in June, 1990 and it sat on 30-6-1990. The pertinent question that arises for consideration is ; what were the materials before the Government at the stage of initial proposal for revision from Rs. 11/- to Rs. 10/- and even thereafter till the stage of publication of the proposal u/s 5(1) (b) or by the date of the decision u/s 5(2) Minimum wage must provide not merely for the bare sustenance of life but for the preservation of efficiency of the worker and so it must also provide for some measure of education, medical requirements and amenities. 10/- and even thereafter till the stage of publication of the proposal u/s 5(1) (b) or by the date of the decision u/s 5(2) Minimum wage must provide not merely for the bare sustenance of life but for the preservation of efficiency of the worker and so it must also provide for some measure of education, medical requirements and amenities. While negativing that the legislature had abdicated its function in favour of the Government, the Supreme Court in Khetriya's case (supra) observed. "...Having regard to the diversity of conditions prevailing and the number of industries covered by the Act the Legislature could obviously not fix uniform minimum rates of wages for all scheduled industries, or for all localities in respect of individual, industries. Working out of detailed provisions relating to the minimum rates the advisability of fixing rates for different industries, ascertainment of localities in which they were to be applied, and the time when they were to be effective, and fixation of time rate, piece rate, or guaranteed time rate had from the very nature of the legislation to be delegated to some authority. In considering the minimum rates of wages for a locality diverse factors, such as. basic rates of wage, special allowance, economic climate of the locality, necessity to prevent exploitation having regard to the absence of organisation amongst the workers, general economic condition of the industrial development in the area, adequacy of wages paid, and earnings in other comparable employments and similar other matters would have to be taken into account......" We express no opinion if the minimum rate of wages for unskilled employee fixed at Rs. 25/- is high or low. Though the counsels have challenged the same as excessive and arbitrary, we have taken no note of them. If the decision has been taken by the Government in accordance with law after complying with the procedure prescribed and duly being cognisant of its responsibility and if all other functionaries have duly discharged their responsibility, the rate fixed would be out side our scrutiny. But what dismays us is that the proposal emanated on the proposal of the Chief Minister. No exercise in depth was undertaken prior to the notification of the proposal. We have already noted that department had suggested for the revision of the minimum rate of wages from Rs. 11/- to Rs. 15/-. But what dismays us is that the proposal emanated on the proposal of the Chief Minister. No exercise in depth was undertaken prior to the notification of the proposal. We have already noted that department had suggested for the revision of the minimum rate of wages from Rs. 11/- to Rs. 15/-. The only factor that intervened between the date of that suggestion and the notification of the proposal is the statement of the Chief Minister on the floor of the Assembly and confirmed by the peremptory assertion of the Minister of State, Labour and Employment, that "minimum wage must be Rs. 25/-" and the Chief Minister's direction that the minimum rats of Rs. 25/- per day should be implemented from 1-4-1990, by-passing and ignoring the mandatory requirement of Section 5. 29. We have noticed the infirmities in the proceedings of the Advisory Board, we have declared the decision invalid being in contravention of Rule 15 and for its failure to discharge its responsibility conscientiously and in a responsible manner. 30. Now let us consider the decision of the Government. Counsel for the petitioners in the various writ applications have urged on us that the decision was taken on the very day the Advisory Board sat. Representations were not considered by the Government and the decision like the whole of the exercise was mere eye-wash. The decision had already in fact been taken by the Government by 24-3-1990. 31. One vital safeguard as the Supreme Court observed against capricious decision of the Government u/s 5(2) is the provision for representation by persons likely to be affected. Admittedly there were representations out of which 487 opposed the proposal. The representations ran to more than a thousand pages. From the file produced before us it does not appear that the Government had considered the representations at any stage prior to 30-6-1990. A summary of the representations has been annexed. But that is not the summary of all the representations but of some. Following is the relevant portion of the decision of the Government u/s 5(2): "...All these objections/suggestions/representations received have been duly considered separately. The Advisory Board appointed u/s 7 of the Minimum Wages Act has also been consulted in the matter in its meeting held on 30th June, 1990. Following is the relevant portion of the decision of the Government u/s 5(2): "...All these objections/suggestions/representations received have been duly considered separately. The Advisory Board appointed u/s 7 of the Minimum Wages Act has also been consulted in the matter in its meeting held on 30th June, 1990. The Advisory Board has recommended that the minimum wages for unskilled category of employees in respect of 79 scheduled employments may be fixed at Rs. 25/-per day for 8 hours of work excluding half an hour of rest and inclusive of the wages payable for the weekly day of rest. Regarding semi-skilled, skilled and highly skilled categories the Board have recommended for setting up of a Sub-Committee to go into the details. The proceedings of the meeting is placed at page--96-83/C. Under the circumstances Government may revise the minimum wages of the unskilled category of employees in the 79 scheduled employments from Rs. 11 /- to Rs. 25/- per day for 8 hours of work excluding half arc hour of rest. The minimum rates of wages may be inclusive of the wages payable for the weekly day of rest. The same may also be made applicable both for male and female workers without any discrimination." This was approved by the Minister of State, Labour and Employment, who was the Chairman of the Board. We repeatedly asked the learned Advocate-General to produce before us any proceeding or file wherein representations had been considered by the Government separately as stated in the order, referred to above. Learned Advocate-General, however, said that the file produced would disclose all that was done and the gist could be the consideration. The gist, Annexure-4, does not show who prepared the same, if that was prepared under the authority of Government and if that was considered by the Government. We have already said that the gist is not of all the representations but of a few, and is so very nebulous that in almost all cases, the reasons for the submissions made by the persons making the representations are not indicated. Nevertheless, it appears therefrom that in certain representations a plea was taken for fixing the minimum rate of wages zonewise according to proposed conditions, stage of development and employmentwise. Nevertheless, it appears therefrom that in certain representations a plea was taken for fixing the minimum rate of wages zonewise according to proposed conditions, stage of development and employmentwise. Inasmuch as no other record was produced to show that the representations had been separately considered by the Government and all that, to which our attention was drawn, by the learned Advocate-General, was the order extracted above, we hold that that the representations were not at all considered by the Government. That alone by itself vitiated the decision as grossly infracting Section 5(2) of the Act. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly said, the right to make representation is an important safeguard against exorcise of arbitrary and uncontrolled power vested in the State Government. That right has to be zealously protested. Considerations of the representations and consultation with the Advisory Board are two mandatory requirements which are sine-qua non for a decision u/s 5(2). The first is non-existent, the second is equally non-existent in the sense that the advice tendered is not advice in accordance with law for the reasons which we have already set out. 32. Counsel have charged that the Government took up the exercise from the stage of Section 5(1)(b) by way of putting a legal garb on an illegitimate decision. Having perused the record and the proceedings of the Advisory Board especially the role played by the Minister of State, Labour and Employment one is left with a nagging feeling that there is perhaps some truth in the allegations that it was an attempt at post facto legitimisation of a fait accompli. 33. We have not given any importance to the submission of the counsel that the Advisory Board was not the properly representative body of the employer and employees since representatives from the 79 employments had not been provided with berths on the Board. That argument may have some tenability in regard to constitution of committee or sub-committee but is not acceptable as regards constitution of the Advisory Board. There need not be on the Board representatives from all the employments concerned. From a commonsense point of view also the Advisory Board cannot consist of 79 representatives of the employers and 79 representatives of the employer besides independent members. The body will be so large that itself would render it useless to reform its function as an Advisory Board. There need not be on the Board representatives from all the employments concerned. From a commonsense point of view also the Advisory Board cannot consist of 79 representatives of the employers and 79 representatives of the employer besides independent members. The body will be so large that itself would render it useless to reform its function as an Advisory Board. We may note certain other arguments advanced by the petitioners, is highlighted by them that until finalisation of the minutes under Rule 17(2), no finality could be attached to the minutes and, therefore, the Government could not have acted upon unconfirmed proceeding of the Advisory Board. The Government proceeded as if there was unanimity amongst the members which was far from truth. One Shri Mayadhar Naik was not an approval committee member in terms of Rule 4(a). The notifications show as if the decision was on the basis of consideration by Government whereas in the counter-affidavit filed the stand was that the consideration was that of the Advisory Board, The Labour Minister, the Finance Secretary and the Labour Secretary and rendered approval to the proposal. Therefore, they could not be considered to be independent members. The Finance Secretary had expressed views about the financial viability and the Labour Minister and the Labour Secretary were parties to the proposal and, therefore, it cannot be considered that they were independent members The attendance of one Rama Chandra Khuntia was also objected to on the ground that there was no scope for extending an invitation to a person who was not a member of the Advisory Board. Though these submissions cannot be said to be without substance, but in view of major infirmities highlighted by us above, we do not think it necessary to delve into these questions in detail. 34. Fixation of minimum rates of wages by the Government in a country where wages are already nominal should not tee interfered with by us in exercise of powers under Article 223 of the Constitution of India and mere irregularities should not vitiate the proceedings of the Advisory Board or Committee, those being recommendatory bodies, the final authority being the Government. The Challenge on the ground of infraction of rules should be based upon substantial grounds. The Challenge on the ground of infraction of rules should be based upon substantial grounds. Fixation of minimum rates of wages is a social welfare measure and the present notifications were made for uplift of conditions of the sweated labour, the employees who give their toil and sweat for the country. But the violations in this case are so grave the infractions are so gross that with considerable reluctance and regret, we declare the 7th notifications invalid. 35. The four scheduled employments, the notifications for revision of minimum rates of wages in respect of which were not challenged are (1) Ceramic and Pottery Industry, (2) Manufacture of Coke & Burning Coals. (c) Ayurvedic and Unani Pharmacy and (4) Public Health Engineering. Since those notifications were not specifically assailed, we cannot invalidate them. We would, however, suggest that having regard to the conclusions reached by us, the Government should with-draw the notifications on its own and take up an exercise for fixing the minimum rate of wages in accordance with the principles, guidelines and observations made by the Supreme Court in various of its decisions and revise the minimum rate of wages in accordance with law. 36. In the result we allow the writ applications and quash the notifications dated 30-6-1990 in regard to the 75 scheduled employments fixing the minimum rate of wages at Rs. 25/- for unskilled employees, in the 75 employments. But we direct that the wages already paid to the unskilled employees pursuant to the notifications shall not be recoverable by the employers. There would be no order as to costs. Final Result : Allowed