1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.90 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.82 OF 2009 Maharashtra General Kamgar Union & Anr. ...Petitioners. v. Shri Sandip Gupta & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr.N.M.Ganguli, adv. For the Petitioners. Mr. S.K.Talsaria i/by Ms.Shilpa Kapil, advs. For the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : APRIL 29, 2010 P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the respondents contends that the affidavit of the respondent no.1 has been filed with statement showing payment to the workers on the basis of last drawn wages. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the payment should have been made for 677 days including weekly offs as the period involved is 23.11.2005 to 30.9.2007. However, the actual payment is made for 580 days. It indicates that payment is deficit to the extent of 97 days because weekly offs are not counted. However, the learned counsel for the respondents points out that as per the Notification dated 5th October, 1994 issued by the Government of Maharashtra under the Minimum 2 Wages Act, the monthly wages are to be calculated on the basis of minimum rate of daily wages but for 26 days. In view of this, it appears that the order has been already complied. If the learned counsel for the petitioners feels that the respondents should be directed to pay for the weekly offs also, petitioners may seek necessary direction from the Court where the writ petition is pending. However, in view of the above circumstances, no further action needs to be taken in the contempt petition. 2 Therefore, the contempt petition stands disposed off. As the contempt petition itself is disposed off, civil application does not survive and stands disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)