THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.1317 OF 2000 ORDER: The order under challenge in this writ petition is the order passed by the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Eluru in M.W.No.67 of 1998 dated 15.11.1999. The order in M.W.No.67 of 1998 was passed on an application filed by the Assistant Labour Officer against the petitioner herein holding that he had employed the workers, mentioned in the claim application, in the tobacco grading establishment, and that he was liable to pay difference of wages of Rs.5642-25 ps. The Minimum Wages authority observed that, in case the petitioner failed to deposit the claim amount within 30 days, he would be liable for one time compensation of Rs.5642-25 ps which should be deposited within seven days thereafter. This Court, by order dated 1.2.2000, granted interim suspension on condition that the petitioner deposits the entire amount of Rs.5642- 25 along with interest, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of the order i.e., on or before 15.2.2000. This Court further observed that, on such deposit, the Assistant Labour Officer shall be entitled to withdraw the same and pay the amount to the workers who were denied the benefits under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. This Court also observed that, in default to comply with the order, the interim order would stand vacated. The order under challenge is a well reasoned order and does not necessitate interference in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However as this Court had, by order dated 1.2.2000, permitted the petitioner to deposit the differential minimum wages of Rs.5642-25 ps within two weeks i.e., on or before 15.2.2000, the time limit specified by the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act for payment of the differential wages of Rs.5642-25 ps, which would otherwise have expired by 15.12.1999, must be held to have been extended, as a result of the interim order of this Court, till 15.2.2000. In case the petitioner has deposited the said sum of Rs.5642-25 on or before 15.2.2000, he would not be liable for payment of the one time compensation of Rs.5642-25 ps. If, however, the petitioner failed to pay the said amount on or before 15.2.2000, it is open to the respondent to initiate proceedings for recovery of not only the differential wages of Rs.5642-25, but also the one time compensation of Rs.5642-25, in accordance with law. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. __________ 29-7-2010 asp