WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C) No.___________of 2017 (Public Interest Litigation) IN THE MATTER OF :Public Interest Litigation, under article 226 The Constitution of India And IN THE MATTER OF :-
Complete failure of the respondent-Delhi Government to implement and enforce the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act and the minimum wages fixed by it from time to time, in Delhi because of apathy and indifference of the government and lack of sufficient strength of enforcement machinery/staff thereby not only failed to protect the fundamental right to life of the workers but also leaving them to work as forced and bonded labour which is prohibited by Art. 23 of the Constitution of India And IN THE MATTER OF:Inadequate, insufficient and meagre minimum wages revised and fixed by the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi vide notification no. F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated 03.03.2017 and Notification no. Addl. L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466 dated 31.05.2017 issued under section 5(2) of the MW Act, in complete ignorance of the factors/norms laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Workmen V/s Raptakos Brett Co. Limited1992 AIR 504, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 129 and thereby violating
WWW.LIVELAW.IN the fundamental right to life of more than 60 lakh workers in Delhi as guaranteed to them by the Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. And IN THE MATTER OF:Art. 21, Article 43 and Article 23 of the Constitution of India and provisions of the Minimum Wages Act and fundamental right to life of the more than 60 lakh workers of Delhi And IN THE MATTER OF:Various Civil writ petitions filed by the employers to challenge the even the said notifications of the Delhi Government alleging that the hike in minimum wages declared by the Delhi Government vide said notification is unreasonable and too much exorbitant. And IN THE MATTER OF:-
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Through Advocate Kusum Sharma, President Ch No. 478-479, Lawyers Chambers, Western Wing, Tis Hazari courts, Delhi-110054 ………………Petitioner Versus
Government of N.C.T. of Delhi through its Chief Secretary, Delhi Secretariat, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002 ………………….Respondent
WWW.LIVELAW.IN To, THE HON‟BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI AND HER COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE SAID HIGH COURT The humble petition of the petitioner above named RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.
That the petitioner submits that it has no personal interest in the litigation and that the petition is not guided by self gain or for gain of any other person/institution/body and that there is no motive other than of public interests in filing the present writ petition.
2.
That the petitioner submits that it very much involved in the matter of implementation of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, Right of citizen to health , rights of the working class and other matters relating to social welfare and has been frequently interacting with the education, health, labour and other authorities of the Government of NCTD of Delhi and the source of averments made in the present writ petition is its personal knowledge and information collected from various sources.
3.
That the petitioner submits that the present writ petition is for the benefit of poor workers as they are incapable of accessing the court themselves.
4.
That the petitioner submits that the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi is likely to be affected by the orders sought in the writ petition and
WWW.LIVELAW.IN which have been impleaded as respondent. The petitioner says that to its knowledge, no other persons/bodies/institutions are likely to be affected by the orders sought in the writ petition.
5.
That Social Jurist, A civil rights group, the petitioner herein, is an organisation of lawyers and social actitivists dedicated to the cause of common man and particularly to the rights of children, and workers relating to education, health and workers‟ rights and Mrs. Kusum
Sharma,
Advocate,
is
the
president
of
the
petitioner/organisation and is authorised and competent to file and prosecute the present writ petition on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is an organisation having registered office at C-29, Janyug Apartments, Sector-14 Ext. Rohini, Delhi-110085. It is submitted that Anuj Agarwal, Advocate and Rohini Agarwal, are the
secretary
and
treasurer
respectively
of
the
petitioner/organisation. The petitioner submits that it has the means to pay the costs, if any, imposed by the Hon‟ble court and submit its undertaking to this Hon‟ble court in that regard.
6.
That the present public interest writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution
of
India
highlights
the
notifications
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated 03.03.2017 and Notification no. Addl. L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466 dated 31.05.2017 whereby the respondent has revised and fixed the minimum wages at a unreasonably
lower
rate,
in
complete
ignorance
of
the
factors/norms laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Workmen V/s Raptakos Brett Co. Limited 1992 AIR 504for
WWW.LIVELAW.IN calculating the minimum wages
and
thereby prescribing
inadequate, insufficient and meagre minimum wages, not enough to even beat the inflation and has thereby violated the fundamental right of the workers to life as guaranteed to them by the Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The present writ petition is also directed against the failure of the respondent to implement the provisions of minimum wages in Delhi, thereby leaving even its own notifications regarding minimum wages unimplemented. The said failure of the respondent has also violated the fundamental right of the workers to life and therefore said inaction of the government also violates Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. The present writ petition highlights the sorrow state of affairs prevailing in the State of Delhi in regard to the implementation and enforcement of the provisions of minimum wages and points out the facts which shows the apathetic and indifferent attitude of the respondent in this regard.
The respondent having failed to enforce the payment of minimum wages in Delhi has also, thereby, failed to prohibit the forced and bonded labour and begar at mass -scale in Delhi. It was held by the Hon‟ble Supreme in court in Bandhua Mukti Morcha case that failure to pay minimum wages amounts to “ begar” which is prohibited by Art. 23 of the Constitution of India.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN The present writ petition is therefore also aimed to seek appropriate directions for enforcement of the provisions of minimum wages. A true copy of the notifications F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated
03.03.2017
Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466
and dated
Notification 31.05.2017
is
no. annexed
herewith as Annexure-P1-collectively.
7.
That the petitioner is a Civil Rights Group and a registered society and have been raising the issues of health, education and employment relating to most downtrodden class of society. The present writ petition is also aimed at espousing the cause of the more than 60 lakh poor workers employed in organised and unorganised sectors of Delhi who are not in a position to come before this Hon‟ble Court. It is submitted that appropriate payment of minimum wages to the workers would favourably affect the education and the health of the children of such workmen.
8.
That the respondent under section of the 5(2) of the Minimum Wages Act is empowered to fix the minimum wages payable under the Delhi State to the workers employed in the scheduled employments.
9.
That the Tripartite Committee of the Indian Labour Conference held in New Delhi in 1957 declared the wage policy which was to be followed during the Second Five Year Plan. The Committee accepted the following five norms for the fixation of „minimum
WWW.LIVELAW.IN wage‟:
(i)
In calculating the minimum wage, the standard working class family should be taken to consist of 3 consumption units for one earner; the earnings of women,
children
and
adolescents
should
be
disregarded.
(ii)
Minimum food requirement should be calculated on the basis of a net intake of calories, as recommended by Dr. Aykroyd for an average Indian adult of moderate
(iii)
activity.
Clothing requirements should be estimated at per capita consumption of 18 yards per annum which would give for the average workers‟ family of four, a total
(iv)
of
72
yards.
In respect of housing, the rent corresponding to the minimum area provided for under Government‟s Industrial Housing Scheme should be taken into consideration in fixing the minimum wages.
(v)
Fuel, lighting and other „miscellaneous‟ items of expenditure should constitute 20% of the total minimum wage.”
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
10.
That the Hon‟ble Supreme court in the case of Secretary Vs. The Management of Reptakos Brett. & Co. Ltd. and Anr, 1992 AIR 504, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 129 held that the concept of „minimum wage‟ is no longer the same as it was in 1936. Even 1957 is waybehind. A worker‟s wage is no longer a contract between an employer and an employee. It has the force of collective bargaining under the labour laws. Each category of the wage structure has to be tested at the anvil of social justice which is the live-fiber of our society today. The Hon‟ble supreme court added the following additional component as a guide for fixing the minimum wage in the industry:“(vi) Children education, medical requirement, minimum recreation including festivals/ceremonies and provision for old age, marriages etc. should further constitute 25% of the total minimum wage.”
11.
That having regard to the six factors/norms as accepted and laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme court, the total minimum wages of the workers in today‟s inflation comes out to be 15173.79.
A true copy of the calculation chart of the minimum wages is annexed herewith as Anneuxre-P2. The said chart was submitted by the various Central Trade Unions to the Delhi Government.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 12.
That, however, the respondent have declared the minimum wages vide the impugned notification at much lower rate than the aforesaid calculation. It is submitted that it is judicially noticeable fact, requiring no evidence, that the minimum wages as fixed by the aforesaid notifications are insufficient and inadequate having regard to the
rising prices of the commodities and services
covered by the aforesaid six factors. The appropriate government has failed to apply its mind while calculating and fixing the minimum wages and has completely ignored the aforesaid factors/norms.
13.
That it would be apt to mention herein that the enforcement of the provisions of the minimum wages in Delhi is at all time low. Even the current minimum wages are not paid by the employer to the workmen and violation of labour laws and minimum wages is atfull swing in absence of any check by the Delhi Government.
14.
That it is estimated that there are about 20 lakh factories and shops in Delhi which falls in the category of scheduled employment wherein about 60 lakh workmen are employed. However, the male workers on an average receive Rs. 6000/- per month and female workers on average receive Rs. 5000/- per month as wages. The average wages of the workers received from their employers is almost half of the current minimum wages.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 15.
That in the Badhua Mukti Morcha case, the Hon‟ble supreme court held that payment of wages less that minimum wages amounts to trafficking, forced and bonded labour and beggar and same is prohibited by Article 23 of the Constitution of India. This means that 30 % of the working population of Delhi could be easily terms as „Beggar‟. The respondent is therefore bound to ensure that no workman in Delhi is paid less than minimum wages and thereby is under constitutional duty, by virtue of Art. 23 of Constitution of India, to save the workers from exploitation and virtual forced labour.
16.
That at present the respondent has failed to maintain an effective machinery to get the provisions of the minimum wages enforced and the notifications issued from time to time by the respondent remains practically unimplemented.
17.
That a report was published in the Indian Express on 05.06.2017 highlighting state of affairs in the Delhi State in regard to the implementation of the minimum wages in Delhi.
18.
That it would be pertinent to point out that in the year, 1980 there was a staff of 519 employees including 72 Labour Inspectors in the Labour Department of Delhi. It is pertinent to mention herein that the Labour Inspectors are the main workforce in the process of implementation of labour laws. Unfortunately, the strength of the staff of the Labour Department has been reduced to 125 with just
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 14 Labour Inspectors who are supposed to implement the 16 labour laws throughout the Delhi whereas the number of factories and establishments with workers employed therein have increased manifolds. The sanctioned vacancies of the Labour Department have been lying vacant because of the apathetic attitude of the respondent and because of putting the issues of workers‟ right at the lowest priority.
19.
That it is therefore most urgent that the strength of the trained labour inspectors must be increased for effective enforcement of the labour laws.
20.
That is would be also pertinent to highlight that while the violation of labour laws and minimum wages is rampant, especially in the unorganised sector, there has been no prosecution done by the respondent for last three years. Not even a single employer has been prosecuted by the respondent for non-payment of minimum wages during the last three years.
21.
That one of the most important fact is that the employers especially in the unorganised sectors do not maintain any record of the employees and workers are paid wags in cash and the employers deny the employer-employee at their ease whenever a union or workmen makes complaint in this regard. Even where the records are maintained, the workers are made to sign at the higher wages but are paid much lower wages in cash.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 22.
That the said problem can be easily countered by making it mandatory that all wages shall be paid by the employerseither by crossed account payee cheques or through RTGS in the account of the workers and any cash payment shall be considered as no payment.
23.
That the petitioner also wrote a letter dated 04.09.2015 to the Chief Minister of Delhi but of no avail.
A true copy of the said letter is annexed herewith as Annexure-P3.
24.
That the petitioner therefore highlights that the minimum rates of wages fixed by the respondent in the notification
no.
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated 03.03.2017 and Notification no. Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466 dated 31.05.2017 are inadequate and need to be increased considering the norms/factors accepted by the Hon‟ble supreme court. The petitioner further challenges the failure of the respondent to enforce the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act because of apathy and indifference of the respondent in maintaining the adequate enforcement machinery and failure to take other measures on the following grounds amongst others.
GROUNDS
A.
Because the respondents before declaring the minimum wages was bound to take into considerations the six factors accepted and laid down by the Hon‟ble Surpeme court in
WWW.LIVELAW.IN the case of Workmen V/s Raptakos Brett Co. Limited 1992 AIR 504, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 129 and the rising prices of the commodities and services covered by the said six factors.
B.
Because having regard to the factors as accepted by the Hon‟ble Supreme court, the total minimum wages comes out to be 15173.79 and the respondents have declared the minimum wages vide the aforesaid notifications at much lower rates. It is submitted that it is judicially noticeable fact, requiring no evidence, that the minimum wages as fixed by the
aforesaid notification is
inadequate having regard to the
insufficient,
rising prices of the
commodities and services mention in the aforesaid six factors.
C.
Because the appropriate government has failed to apply its mind while calculating and fixing the minimum wages and has completely ignored the aforesaid factors and has laid down the much lower rates of wages.
D.
Because the enforcement of the provisions of the minimum wages in Delhi is at all time low. Even the current minimum wages are not paid by the employers to the workmen and violation of labour laws and minimum wages is at full swing in absence of any check by the Delhi Government.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
E.
Because the respondent is duty bound to enforce the provisions of the
minimum wages but at present the
respondent has failed to maintain effective machinery to get the provisions of the minimum wages enforced and the notifications issued from time to time by the respondent remains practically unimplemented.
F.
Because the strength of the staff of the Labour Department has been reduced to 125 with just 14 Labour Inspectors who are supposed to implement the 16 labour laws throughout the Delhi whereas the number factories and establishments with workers employed therein have increased manifolds. The sanctioned vacancies of the Labour Department have been lying vacant because of the apathetic attitude of all the respondents and because of putting the issues of workers right at the lowest priority.
G.
Because it is most urgent that the strength of the trained labour
inspectors
must
be
increased
for
effective
enforcement of the labour laws.
H.
Because the tendency of the employer to pay less than minimum wages can be easily countered by making it mandatory that all wages shall be paid by the employer either by crossed cheques or through RTGS in the account of the workers and any cash payment shall be considered as no payment.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
I.
Because
the
aforesaid
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 Notification
no.
notification dated
03.03.2017
Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466
no. and dated
31.05.2017 of the respondent having been passed without considering the norms/factors accepted by the Hon‟ble supreme court and fixing minimum wages at much lower rates, violate of the fundamental rights to life of more than 60 lakh workers as guaranteed to them by Article 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act
J.
Because the failure of the respondent to enforce the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act because of apathy and indifference of the respondent in maintaining the adequate enforcement machinery and failure to take other measures also violates the right to life of the workers as guaranteed them by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
K.
Because the aforesaid actions and inactions and failures violate the Article 21 and 43 of the Constitution of India.
L.
Because payment of wages less that minimum wages amounts to trafficking, forced and bonded labour and beggar and same is prohibited by Article 23 of the Constitution of India. The respondent is therefore bound to ensure that no workman in Delhi is paid less than minimum
WWW.LIVELAW.IN wages and thereby is under constitutional duty, by virtue of Art. 23 of Constitution of India, to save the workers from exploitation and virtual forced labour.
M.
Because the impugned notifications and inactions of the respondent also otherwise illegal and bad in law.
25.
That the Petitioner has no other alternative efficacious remedy available to her except to approach this Hon‟ble Court by way of the present Writ Petition.
26.
That the Petitioner has not filed any other Writ Petition either in this Hon‟ble Court or in any other High Court or in the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India against the aforesaid actions/inactions on the part of the Respondents and no such case is pending.
27. That the annexures as annexed hereto are true and correct copies of their respective originals.
PRAYER In the premise aforesaid, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon‟ble Court may be pleased to:I.
Direct the respondent to forthwith enforce the rates of minimum wages
in
terms
of
the
notification
no.
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated 03.03.2017 and Notification
WWW.LIVELAW.IN no. Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466 dated 31.05.2017 (Annexure-P1collectively); II.
Direct the respondent to increase the strength of the trained Labour Inspectors and other staff of labour department and to fill the vacant vacancies;
III.
Direct the respondent to ensure that the payment of wages to all the workmen is made through account payee cheques or RTGS;
IV.
Direct the respondent to consider for further increase of rates of minimum wages at least to the tune of Rs. 15173.79 in terms of the norms laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme court in the case of Workmen V/s Raptakos Brett Co. Limited 1992 AIR 504, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 129
V.
pass any such other or further orders as may be deemed just and appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the interest of justice, in favor of the petitioner; and
VI.
allow the present writ petition with cost, in favour of the petitioner.
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C)No.___________of 2017 ( Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi Index S.No.
Particulars
Page No.
1.
Notice of Motion
2.
Urgent applications
3.
Memo of parties
4.
Certificate
5.
List of Dates and Events
6.
Civil writ petition/PIL under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India along
with
Supporting Affidavit.
7.
A true copy of the resolution passed in governing body meeting dated 08.09.2017
8.
Annexure-P1-collectively A
true
copy
of
the
notifications
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 04.03.2017
and
Notification
Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466
dated no. dated
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 31.05.2017 9.
Annexure-P2 A true copy of the calculation chart of the minimum wages
10.
Annexure-P3 A true copy of the letter dated 04.09.2015 of the petitioner
11.
Vakalatnama
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C)No.___________of 2017 ( Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi Memo of Parties Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Ch No. 478-479, Lawyers Chambers, Western Wing, Tis Hazari, Delhi-110054
……Petitioner
Versus
1.
Government of N.C.T. of Delhi Through its Chief Secretary, Delhi Secretariat, ITO, New Delhi-110002
…..Respondent
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
RESOLUTION
The Executive Committee of Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group, in its meeting held on 08.07.2017 under the present Mrs. Kusum Sharma, Advocate, has passed the following resolution:-
Unanimously resolved that Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group , should file a PIL in the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court Seeking directions to the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi to forthwith implement the minimum wages by increasing the strength of its staff, making mandatory payment of minimum wages by cheque or RTGS in account of workers and fix the minimum wages at higher level having regard to the factors laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court
Kusum Sharma, President Jurist, A Civil Rights Group
WWW.LIVELAW.IN List of Dates
03.03.2017:
The
respondent
issued
the
F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859
notifications
dated
03.03.2017
thereby fixing the minimum wages of the workers at much lower level. 31.05.2017:
The respondent issued the notifications Notification no. Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466 dated 31.05.2017 thereby again fixing the minimum wages at much lower level. The present public interest writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India highlights the Notification F.Addl.LC/Lab/MW/2016/4859 dated 03.03.2017
and
Addl.L.C/Lab/MW/2016/466
Notification dated
no. 31.05.2017
whereby the respondent has revised and fixed the minimum wages at a unreasonably lower rate, in complete ignorance of the factors/norms laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Workmen V/s Raptakos Brett Co. Limited 1992 AIR 504 for calculating
the
minimum
wages
and
thereby
prescribing inadequate, insufficient and meagre minimum wages, not enough to even beat the inflation and has thereby violated the fundamental right of the workers to life as guaranteed to them by the Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN The present writ petition is also directed against the failure of the respondent to implement the provisions of minimum wages in Delhi, thereby leaving even its own
notifications
regarding
minimum
wages
unimplemented. The said failure of the respondent has also violated the fundamental right of the workers to life and therefore said inaction of the government also violates Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. The present writ petition highlights the sorrow state of affairs prevailing in the State of Delhi in regard to the implementation and enforcement of the provisions of minimum wages and points out the facts which shows the apathetic and indifferent attitude of the respondent in this regard. The respondent having failed to enforce the payment of minimum wages in Delhi has also, thereby, failed to prohibit the forced and bonded labour and beggar at mass - scale in Delhi. It was held by the Hon‟ble Supreme in court in Bandhua Mukti Morcha case that failure to pay minimum wages amounts to “beggar” which is prohibited by Art 23 of the Constitution of India. The present writ petition is therefore also aimed to seek appropriate directions for enforcement of the provisions of minimum wages.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN The enforcement of the provisions of the minimum wages in Delhi is at all time low. Even the current minimum wages are not paid by the employer to the workmen and violation of labour laws and minimum wages is at full swing in absence of any check by the Delhi Government. It is estimated that there are about 20 lakh factories and shops in Delhi which falls in the category of scheduled employment wherein about 60 lakh workmen are employed. However, the male workers on an average receive Rs. 6000/- per month and female workers on average receive Rs. 5000/- per month as wages. The average wages of the workers received from their employers is almost half of the current minimum wages. At present the respondent has failed to maintain an effective machinery to get the provisions of the minimum wages enforced and the notifications issued from time to time by the respondent remains practically unimplemented. That it would be pertinent to point out that in the year, 1980 there was a staff of 519 employees including 72 Labour Inspectors in the Labour Department of Delhi. It is pertinent to mention herein that the Labour Inspectors are the main workforce in the process of
WWW.LIVELAW.IN implementation of labour laws. Unfortunately, the strength of the staff of the Labour Department has been reduced to 125 with just 14 Labour Inspectors who are supposed to implement the 16 labour laws throughout the Delhi whereas the number of factories and establishments with workers employed therein has increased manifolds. The sanctioned vacancies of the Labour Department have been lying vacant because of the apathetic attitude of the respondent and because of putting the issues of workers‟ right at the lowest priority. That it is therefore most urgent that the strength of the trained labour inspectors must be increased for effective enforcement of the labour laws. It is would be also pertinent to highlight that while the violation of labour laws and minimum wages is rampant, especially in the unorganised sector, there has been no prosecution done by the respondent for last three years. Not even a single employer has been prosecuted by the respondent for non-payment of minimum wages during the last three years. That one of the most important fact is that the employers especially in the unorganised sectors do not maintain any record of the employees and workers are paid wags in cash and the employers deny the
WWW.LIVELAW.IN employer-employee at their ease whenever a union or workmen makes complaint in this regard. Even where the records are maintained, the workers are made to sign at the higher wages but are paid much lower wages in cash. That the said problem can be easily countered by making it mandatory that all wages shall be paid by the employers either by crossed account payee cheques or through RTGS in the account of the workers and any cash payment shall be considered as no payment. Hence the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions for implementation of the minimum wages in Delhi and for further revision of wages at higher rates.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C)No.___________of 2017 (Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi Affidavit
I , Kusum Sharma W/o Shri Suniti Sharma, age about 47 years, C/o 478479, Lawyers Chambers, Western Wing, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi110054, do herbey solemnly affirm and declare as under:1. That I am the President of the petitioner –society having its registered office at C-29, Janyug Apartment, Sector-14 Extn. Rohini, Delhi-110085 and vide resolution passed in the Meeting of the Executive committee of the petitioner on 07.01.2015, I have been authorised to file the present writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation on behalf of the petitioner. 2. That I have filed the present writ petition a Public Interest Litigation. 3. That I have gone through the Delhi High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 and do hereby affirm that the present Public Interest Litigation is in conformity thereof. 4. That the petitioner has no personal interest I the litigation and neither myself nor anybody in whom the petitioner is interested
WWW.LIVELAW.IN would in any manner benefit from the relief sought in the present litigation save as a member of the General Public. This petition is not guided by self gain or gain of any person, institution, body and there is no motive other than of public interest in filling this petition. 5. That I have done whatsoever inquiry/investigation which was in my power to do, to collect all data/material which was available and which was relevant for this court to entertain the present petition. 6. That I further confirm that the contents of the present PIL are true and correct to the bests of my knowledge and I have not concealed in the present petition any date/material/information which may have enabled this court to form an opinion whether to entertain this petition or no and/or whether to grant any relief or not.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:-
Verified at Delhi on this 10 th July, 2017 that the facts as stated in the above affidavit are correct and true to my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C)No.___________of 2017 (Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi
NOTICE OF MOTION Sir, Take notice that the accompanying Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will be listed before Court on _____ 2017at 10.30 0‟clock, or so soon thereafter as may be convenient to the Court.
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C)No.___________of 2017 (Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi URGENT APPLICATION TO THE REGISTRAR HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI.
Sir, Kindly treat the accompanying Writ Petition as an urgent one. Therefore, kindly list it urgently in accordance with the High Court Rules, Practice and Procedure. Thanking you,
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C)No.___________of 2017 (Public Interest Litigation)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
……Petitioner
Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group Versus
…….Respondent
Government of N.C.T.of Delhi CERTIFICATE
Complete records in connection with the grievances of the petitioner pertaining to impugned failure on the part of respondent to ensure the payment of minimum wages to the workers has been filed with the present writ petition and nothing more is required to be filed for adjudication of the present petition and no other records other than the same have been filed along with the instant writ petition/PIL.
Ashok Agarwal & M.N.Singh Advocates for the Petitioner 483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers, Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003 Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923 Place: New Delhi Dated: 10.07.2017
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
