C. R. No. 3538 OF 1987. ****** The State of Punjab vs Manjit Singh Present : Mr. Peeyush Kant Jain, Addl.A.G Punjab for the petitioner. None for the respondent. ******* Prayer in this revision petition is for setting aside the order, dated 1.9.1986, passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, Jalandhar, as also the order, dated 10.3.1987, passed by the District Judge- cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, affirming the aforementioned order. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a punishment of stoppage of one increment, without cumulative effect, was imposed upon the respondent. The Authority, under the Payment of Wages Act, held that the order of punishment was illegal and, therefore, directed payment of wages to the respondent. This order was upheld by the Appellate Authority. It is submitted that the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, has no jurisdiction to opine as to the legality of an order of punishment, passed under the provisions of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970. Reliance, for the above proposition, is placed upon State of Punjab vs Baldev Singh, Conductor, 1999(1) SCT 536, and State of Punjab vs Dildar Singh, 2007(1) SCT 202. Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the CR No.3538 of 1987 : 2 : impugned orders. The Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, as also the Appellate Authority, accepted the respondent's prayer for wages by holding that the order, stopping of one increment, without cumulative effect, was illegal. Authorities under the Payment of Wages Act do not have have jurisdiction to opine as to the legality or otherwise of an order of punishment, even where the order effects the wages of an employee. Reference in this regard is made to State of Punjab vs Baldev Singh, Conductor (supra) and State of Punjab vs Dildar Singh (supra). The controversy herein is squarely covered by the aforementioned judgments. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed and the order, dated 1.9.1986, passed by the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, Jalandhar, as also the order, dated 10.3.1987, passed by the District Judge- cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Wages Act are set aside. No order as to costs. ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) January 23, 2008. JUDGE `kk'