IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 29971 of 1998 Between: 1 National Mazdoor Union, Rep by its Depot Secretary T.Sudhakar, Jeedimetla Depot. 2 A.P.S.R.T.C. Lrmika Sangh (BMS), Rep by its Depot Secretary P.Mahesh babu, Jeedimetla Depot. 3 A.P.S.R.T.C. Staff & Workers Federation, Rep by its Depot Secretary P.Satyanarayana, Jeedimetla Depot. 4 A.P.S.R.T.C. Transport Mazdoor Sangh, Rep by its Depot Secretary Md Saber, Jeedimetla Depot. 5 A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees Union, Rep by its Depot Secretary B.mallaih, Jeedimetla Depot. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Vice Chairman & Managing Director A.P.S.R.T.C. Musheerabad, Hyderabad-20. 2 The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Sanathnagar Division, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C, Jeedimetla Depot, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned show cause No.01/781(2)/98-JDM dt.26-10-98 issued by the 3rd Respondents herein jurisdiction and consequently restrain the Respondents herein in making any deductions of 7 days wages as penal wage cut from the salary bill of June 1998 payable on 27th October, 1998 or any other subsequent dates. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR. G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents : MR. AANIL KUMAR The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.29971 OF 1998 ORDER : Heard both sides. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Jeedimetla Depot, Hyderabad, dated 26.10.1998, directing deduction of wages for three (3) days from the salary of the employees listed in the Annexure to the said proceedings as arbitrary and illegal. It is primarily contended on behalf of the petitioners that since all the employees against whom wage cut was ordered in the impugned proceedings were drawing salary of more than Rs.1,600/- per month the provisions of Payment of Wages Act, 1936 are not attracted. It is not in dispute that the impugned proceedings dated 26.10.1998 were passed in exercise of the powers conferred under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. The specific plea in the writ petition that the employees against whom the impugned order was passed were drawing more than Rs.1,600/- per month was not disputed in the counter- affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. It is also brought to my notice that in TYRE RETREADING SHOP COMMITTEE v. APSRTC[1] this Court held that in respect of the workmen who were drawing the salary exceeding Rs.1,600/- per month, no wage cut can be ordered in exercise of powers conferred under the Act. Since the members of the petitioner unions are also similarly situated, the ratio laid down in TYRE RETREADING SHOP COMMITTEE’S case (1 supra) squarely applies and accordingly the impugned order is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 23.03.2009 gbs [1] 1999 (5) ALD 619