Bihar State Mineral ... v. Sub Divisional Magis...

Satyeshwar Roy, J.:— Heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the facts and circumstances, this application is being disposed of at this stage on merit.

2. In a proceeding under S. 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (the Act), respondent 1, the Authority under the Act attached all the movable and immovable properties of Eastern Managnese and Minerals, Ltd., under S. 17-A, by order, dated 9 May 1980.

3. Respondents 2 and 4 filed an application for release of the machineries lying in the mines claiming that those belong to them. After bearing the petitioner and respondents 2 and 4, by order, dated 23 July, 1985 and 25 July 1986, respondent 1 ordered that the petitioner shall pay Rs. 13,000 to respondents 2 and 4 as rent for the machineries. This has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.

4. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the authority had no jurisdiction to direct the payment of rent to respondents 2 and 4 as that is not envisaged under S. 17-A of the Act.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 2 and 4 submitted that they had filed an application before the authority for release of the machineries and instead of releasing the machineries the authority directed for payment of rent to them on the ground that the mining operation may suffer because of the lack of machineries.

6. Section 17-A of the Act provides that the authority, if satisfied that the employer or any other person responsible for payment of wages under S. 3 is likely to evade payment of any amount that may be directed to be paid under S. 15 or S. 17, may pass an order attaching so much of the property of the employer or other person responsible for the payment of wages which would be sufficient to satisfy the amount which may be payable under the direction.

7. On perusal of S. 17-A of the Act, it will be clear that order of attachment before final order may be made to secure payment of the amount that may be directed to be paid under S. 15 or S. 17 of the Act. Section 15 of the Act makes provision for claims where there has been any deduction from wages of any employed person or any payment of wages has been delayed. Section 17 provides for appeal. The attachment, therefore, is for the purpose of making the payment of the amount that may be finally passed under the Act. It does not envisage payment of money on any account except with regard to a claim which may be made under S. 15.

8. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for respondents 2 and 4 submitted that the authority may be directed to release the machineries in their favour. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the machineries in question do not belong to respondents 2 and 4.

9. What may be attached under Sub-sec. (1) of S. 17-A is the property of the employer or other person responsible for payment of wages. Sub-section (2) says that the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure (the Code) relating to attachment before judgment under the Code shall, so far as may be, apply to any order made under Sub-sec. (1). Order 38 of the Code lays down the procedure to be followed in case of attachment before judgment. Provision is there for making claim to property attached or alleged to be attached. Procedure has been laid down for disposing such claim.

10. For the reasons aforesaid, we allow this application, quash annexures 13, 14, 15 and 17 to this writ petition and remand the matter to the authority for passing fresh order on the application filed by respondents 2 and 4 for releasing the machineries in their favour. The authority will do this after hearing the parties.