IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 24.09.2010 C.R.No.6190 of 2010 (O&M) Devinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus Parveen Kaur ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Ajay Mehra, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present revision petition is to an order passed by the learned trial Court on 05.08.2010, whereby ` 1000/- each was awarded as maintenance to the respondent and to the minor child. The grievance of the petitioner is that the salary of the petitioner is ` 2500/- per month as driver, as per salary certificate attached, therefore, the amount of maintenance pendente lite awarded is not justifiable. The learned trial Court has rightly not believed the said salary certificate. The petitioner is a skilled person. The salary of ` 2500/- is less than the minimum wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. An able-bodied person like the present petitioner has the capacity to earn much more than the salary reflected in the salary certificate. Prima facie, the salary certificate is procured one and cannot be relied upon to assess the wages of a driver, as the petitioner claims to be. In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the learned trial Court, which may warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed. 24.09.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE