Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 383 (KAR)

State of Karnataka v. P. Rudrappa

2010-03-25

D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR, N.ANANDA

body2010
Judgment : 1. The subject matter of this writ petition at the instance of the mighty Government is the order dated 08.08.2008 passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in Application No. 8356/2003. 2. The application filed by one P.Rudrappa who had worked as a Watchman in a Government Girls Hostel at Sandur, Bellary District was for seeking the minimum wages payable to daily wage workers as it appears the State Government was content with paying a pittance of Rs. 100/- p.m. to the watchman. 3. During the pendency of the application before the Tribunal, the applicant died, and, therefore, it became the burden of the legal representatives, viz., his wife and children to carry on the fight for the legitimate amount due to Mr. Rudrappa. 4. Application was contested on behalf of the respondent-State even to deny a person whose services the State Government had availed on daily wages without paying the minimum wages as stipulated in terms of the Minimum Wages Act. 5. The respondents in the application had produced a Government Circular dated 26.05.1997 issued by the State Government stipulating the minimum daily wages to such persons at Rs. 35.50 per day and the amount paid to the deceased fell far short of this minimum wage. 6. No wonder the Administrative Tribunal allowed the application and directed the State Government to make good by paying the difference to the legal representatives within six months. It is against such a most warranted order, on facts and law, and even within the perception of justice in any sense of the word ‘justice’ the present writ petition if filed by the irresponsible, unconcerned and insensitive State Government. 7. We have not come across a more frivolous petition than the instant petition presented by the State Government before this Court that too invoking Article 227 jurisdiction for denying even the minimum wages to an employee who had served the State on daily wage basis from the year 1994 onwards till his death while still in service or immediately on retirement. 8. Mr.C.S. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate who normally is quite vociferous in his submissions has mellowed down in this petition looking at the facts of this petition and is only feeling sorry that the State Government should have come up with such petition to this court. 8. Mr.C.S. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate who normally is quite vociferous in his submissions has mellowed down in this petition looking at the facts of this petition and is only feeling sorry that the State Government should have come up with such petition to this court. We quite appreciate the unenviable position of Sri Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate to make submissions on a petition of this nature. We only feel sorry that the Government run by bureaucrats is very much insensitive and takes up such most unrighteous causes, fights cantankerously much more than a cantankerous litigant to waste the time of this Court with two Judges of this Court being required to examine the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India which is directed against the order passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal. 9. On merits the minimum wages have to be inevitably paid to the employee in terms of the Government Notification referred to above. We fail to understand as to how the writ petitioners are oblivious to the circumstances and make themselves bold to present such a writ petition before this Court unmindful of the resulting consequences. 10. The respondents though served obviously would have been more upset and panic-stricken by receipt of the Court notice and perhaps without any means for causing appearance on their behalf have remained unrepresented. The Writ petition only deserves to be dismissed but for good measure with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- on the state Government as an exceptional case though the respondents have not been able to appear before this court we direct the costs to be remitted to the respondents by the State Government by ensuring the payment at their doorstep within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order along with the payment as required to be made in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal and file a compliance report before this Court in the Registry whereupon the matter be listed for orders to record compliance of this order or otherwise. Writ petition is dismissed with exemplary costs as indicated above.