IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.11608 of 2009 Date of decision : 27.5.2011 Sultan Singh ....Petitioner Versus The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Kurukshetra and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.A.P.Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. The claim of the petitioner for grant of minimum wages had been declined on the ground that he was not entitled to any benefit from the period 1.9.2004 to 30.4.2006 as it was beyond the limit of six months as prescribed in the statute. The claim from 1.5.2006 to 1.9.2006 was declined as the petitioner had failed to produce the notification and substantiate his case. Notice of motion was issued to the respondents but no one had put in appearance on their behalf. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the impugned order suffers from illegality and results in grave miscarriage of justice. The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is required to be aware of the minimum wages applicable and C.W.P.No.11608 of 2009 -2- prevalent so as to enable it to perform its adjudicatory functions. It cannot discard the plea which has been raised before it on the ground that the same has not been fortified by the requisite notification for the simple reason that it is a special authority under the Act which is meant to ensure the benefits of legislation which cannot be made hostage to technicalities of law. The impugned order is thus set aside and the petitioner is held entitled to the minimum wages prevalent for the periof for which the claim has been made i.e. 1.5.2006 to 1.9.2006. The matter is remitted back to the Authority to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the prevalent rates under the Act. The needful be done within a period of four months from the receipt of copy of the order. Petition disposed of. 27.5.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss