JUDGMENT S.N. PRASAD, J. - Order passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Authorized Officer under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 dated 26.11.1997 in application MWA No. 149 of 1996 is under challenge whereby and where under the petitioner was been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,30,874.06 paise to be paid to 44 unskilled workers within 30 days of receipt of order through demand draft drawn in favour of the workman towards differential wages for the period from dated 01.09.1995 to 19.09.1996. 2.The petitioner has taken two grounds in assailing the order i.e. (i) the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) is not the competent authority being not an appropriate authority to adjudicate the claim regarding the minimum wages and (ii) the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) has passed the order without appreciating the fact that there was a settlement between the Union and the management. 3.While on the other hand, learned counsel representing the Union has vehemently opposed the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that the management is the Rubber Board of India and its Regional Research Station situated in the district of Dhenkanal in the State of Odisha and since it is directly under the control of Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India, hence the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) is the competent authority under the provision of Minimum Wages Act, 1948. He further submits that there is no infirmity in the award since the authorities has directed to pay the differential wages which has not been paid to the workers in spite of the fixation of minimum wages even then the workers doing the cultivation/plantation is covered under the scheduled employment of Section 2(g) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. 4.Before going into the merit of the order, it would be relevant to have a discussion of certain provision of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. What is the meaning of appropriate Government within the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the same has been defined under Section 2(b) which speaks as follows:- 2.(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, oil field 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 “competent authority” is defined under Section 2(c) which speaks as follows:- 2.(c) “competent authority” means the authority appointed by the appropriate Government by notification in its Official Gazette to ascertain from time to time the cost of living index number applicable to the employees employed in the scheduled employments specified in such notification. The “scheduled employment” is defined under Section 2(g) which speaks as follows:- 2. (g) “scheduled employment “ means an employment specified in the Schedule, or any process or branch of work forming part of such employment. The ‘employee’ is defined under Section 2(i) which speaks as follows:- 2(i) “employee” means any person who is employed for hire or reward to do any work, skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical, in a scheduled employment in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed; and includes on out-worker to whom any articles or materials are given out by another person to be made up, cleaned, washed, altered, ornamented, finished, repaired, adapted or otherwise processed for sale for the purposes of the trade or business of that other person where the process is to be carried out either in the home of the outworker or in some other premises not being premises under the control and management of that other person; and also includes an employee declared to be an employee by the appropriate Government; but does not include any member of the Armed Forces of the [Union]. Section 3 contains provision for “fixing of minimum rates of wages” to be fixed by the appropriate Government as per the procedure laid down in this regard under provision of Section 4 and Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Section 20 (2) contains a provision to adjudicate the claim to be adjudicated by the appropriate Government. Section 2(g) contains the definition of “scheduled employment” which means an employment specified in the Schedule, or any process or branch of work forming part of such employment and in the Scheduled Part-I, the employment in any plantation that is to say, any estate which is maintained to the purpose of growing cinchona, rubber, tea or coffee. Section 2(g) contains the definition of “scheduled employment” which means an employment specified in the Schedule, or any process or branch of work forming part of such employment and in the Scheduled Part-I, the employment in any plantation that is to say, any estate which is maintained to the purpose of growing cinchona, rubber, tea or coffee. The definition of the “appropriate Government” as per Section 2(b) means 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, oil field 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]. 5.From the pleadings, it transpires to us that the workers of the Rubber Board which has been established in the district of Dhenkanal is part of the Rubber Research Institute of India under the Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India. Since this Rubber Board is under Rubber Research Institute which is directly under the control of Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India, as such there is no denial about the fact that appropriate Government would be the Central Government as per the definition of “appropriate Government” as provided under Section 2(b) of the Act. 6.In view of the explicit and expressed provision and in view of the fact that the Rubber Board is directly under the control of Rubber Research Institute having been controlled by the Ministry of Commerce, the appropriate Government will be the Central Government, as such first ground taken by the learned Counsel for the petitioner-management is of no foundation and accordingly, the same is rejected. 7.So far as the second ground is concerned, it is not in dispute that the workers had been engaged in the Rubber Board for plantation of rubber and as such the worker will come under the “scheduled employment” as per the definition as contained in Section 2(g) and the scheduled mentioned therein as per which rubber plantation is found mentioned at Sl. N. 4 of the Schedule Part-I, hence it is coming under the “scheduled employment”. Since the work which had been performed by the worker is coming under the “scheduled employment”, hence they are entitled to be given minimum rates of wages to be fixed by the appropriate Government i.e., the Central Govt. from time to time. N. 4 of the Schedule Part-I, hence it is coming under the “scheduled employment”. Since the work which had been performed by the worker is coming under the “scheduled employment”, hence they are entitled to be given minimum rates of wages to be fixed by the appropriate Government i.e., the Central Govt. from time to time. 8.The workers have been paid their wages as per the notified minimum wages for agriculture applicable by the State Govt. from time to time. For ready reference the same is being given by a chart. For proper appreciation of the chart, it is being reproduced herein below:- Sl. No. Period Days Central Govt. Notified Minimum wage for agriculture Paid State Govt. notified wage Balance per day payable Payable to each from SL.Nos. 1 to 43. 1 From 1.4.1995 to 30.9.1995 vide Central Govt. Notificatin dt. 14.03.1995 Minimum Wages for Agriculture under Annexure B/3 (Page-9 additional counter) 158 Rs. 46.62 Rs. 25.00 Rs. 21.62 Rs. 3415.96 2 From 1.10.1995 to 31.3.1996 Vide Notification dt. 18.9.1995 Annexure-C/3 (Page-13 Additional Counter) 159 Rs. 49.79 Rs. 25.00 Rs. 24.79 Rs. 935.25 3 From 1.4.1996 to 19.9.1996 Vide Notification dt. 20.3.1996 Annexure-D/3 (Page-19 Additional Counter) 158 Rs. 55.53 Rs. 25.00 Rs. 30.53 Rs. 4823.74 Total Rs. 12,174.95 The rate of minimum wages as has been given in the Chart hereinabove has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and from its perusal, it is evident that from 1.4.1995 to 30.09.1995, the minimum wages was paid @ Rs. 25.000 which has been notified by the State Government vide Notification dated 14.03.1995. The minimum wages for agriculture from 1.10.1995 to 31.3.1996 was Rs. 49.79 which has been notified vide Notification dated 18.9.1995 and from 1.4.1996 to 19.9.1996, it has been paid @ Rs. 55.53 which has been notified vide Notification dated 20.3.1996. 9.Thus, the wages has been paid on the basis of Notification of State Government instead of minimum wages fixed and notified by the Central Government as would be evident from the table wherein Column No. 4 contains rate of minimum wages notified by the Central Government, while Column No. 5 contains the rate of minimum wages as per notification of the State Government as per which amount has been paid. 10.The petitioner-management is well aware of the fact that it is coming under the Central Government but even then the workman has been paid minimum wages as per the Notification of the State Government and as such a claim under Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 has been raised for realization of differential amount of Rs. 5,30,847. 06 (Rs. Rs. 12,174.95 each as per the Sl. No. 1 to 43 and Rs. 7,351. 21 to Sl. No. 44) 11.The authority authorized the minimum wages who had adjudicated the claim has considered the grievance of the workman which has been raised by way of an application supported by a separate application for condonation of delay. So far as condonation of delay is concerned, where transpires from the record that the same has not been objected by the petitioner-management and as such the delay was condoned. The matter was set for hearing on the merits of the claim of the parties. The authorized authority has passed order by making the conclusion that the Rubber Board is directly under the control of Ministry of Commerce, Union of India under the Rubber Research Institute and as such the appropriate Government for fixing the minimum wages would be the Central Government. 12.The admitted position in this case is that the rate having been notified by the Central Government for agriculture has been mentioned in Column No. 3, while the rate notified by the State Government, which has been reproduced by way of table which has been taken note by us from the written note of submission filed on behalf of opposite party no. 3, a copy of the same has also been served upon the learned counsel representing the petitioner management herein and he has not raised any objection to that effect. 13.Thus, it is evident that the workman has been paid minimum wages as per the notification issued by the State Government while it should have been paid on the basis of the rate fixed by the Central Government and taking into consideration this aspect of the matter, the authorities have passed the order for making payment of differential amount as per the Central Government Notification w.e.f. 1.4.1995 to 19.9.1996. Taking into consideration the reason behind passing the order by the authority, we find that the order suffers from no infirmity. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Taking into consideration the reason behind passing the order by the authority, we find that the order suffers from no infirmity. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 14.The issue in this writ petition is for issuance of direction upon the petitioner-management to make payment of minimum wages. Admittedly, the same has been avoided by the petitioner by not making payment as per the entitlement of the workman as discussed hereinabove and this has been done by the petitioner intentionally since the Rubber Board is a creation of the Body under Rubber Research Institute directly under control of Ministry of Commerce, Union of India and as such the Notification for refixing of minimum wages will have to be done by the Central Government but the petitioner-management intentionally has deprived the workman in making the payment of minimum wages as per legal entitlement. The differential wages pertains to the midst of the year 1995 till the month of September 1996 and since then 21 years has already been lapsed and for the said long period the workman has been deprived from the legitimate claim and as such we have thought it proper to compensate the workman by making the petitioner-management to pay simple interest @ 9% per annum apart from the principal amount within eight weeks from the date of production of copy of this order, failing in making payment within the stipulated period will entitle the workman to get further interest of 9% from the due date till the date of realization. In terms of observations and directions hereinabove, the writ petition stands disposed of. Petition dismissed.