Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital ordered to pay arrears and adhere to statutory wage obligations under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Shail Jain, has reinforced the statutory rights of a workman to receive minimum wages during the pendency of proceedings, as per Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The judgment came in response to an application filed by Vijender Singh, a former ward boy at Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital, who alleged non-compliance with the court's order dated 21.09.2007, which mandated payment of last drawn wages or minimum wages, whichever is higher, during the ongoing litigation.
The case originated when Vijender Singh, having been dismissed in 2000 amid allegations of misconduct, sought reinstatement through the Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with full back wages. However, the hospital challenged the decision in a writ petition, during which the court stayed the tribunal's award. Subsequently, Singh filed for interim relief under Section 17-B, which was granted, requiring the hospital to pay him subsistence wages during the case's pendency.
Despite the order, Singh contended that the hospital failed to adjust payments in line with periodically revised minimum wages, continuing to pay a stagnant sum of Rs. 11,426 per month against the notified Rs. 18,456 as of April 2025. The court found merit in Singh's claims, emphasizing that Section 17-B imposes a statutory obligation that supersedes any private wage agreements, ensuring the workman's sustenance and dignity.
The court concluded that while the hospital's non-compliance was evident, immediate vacating of the stay order would be disproportionate. Instead, it directed the hospital to pay arrears amounting to Rs. 4,82,394 within six weeks and ensure future payments align with statutory minimum wages. Failure to comply would attract interest on the arrears.
This ruling highlights the judiciary's role in upholding labor rights, particularly amidst prolonged legal battles, and reinforces the employer's duty to adhere to statutory wage provisions, ensuring fair treatment of workmen during litigation.
Bottom line:-
Industrial Disputes Act - Non-compliance with Section 17-B, which mandates payment of last drawn wages or minimum wages to a workman during the pendency of proceedings, disentitles the employer from continuing to enjoy the benefit of an interim stay order.
Statutory provision(s): Section 17-B, Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital v. Vijender Singh, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2900919
