CR No.1504 of 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1504 of 1996 Date of Decision: 23.10.2008 Mohinder Lal ....Petitioner Vs. The General Managers & Ors. ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.C.M.Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral) This order of mine shall dispose of eight revision petitions bearing Nos. 1504 to 1511 of 1996 all titled Mohinder Lal Vs. General The Manager Manager & Ors. as common questions of law and facts are involved in all these petitions. For facility, facts are being taken from CR No.1504 of 1996. The petitioner by invoking revisional jurisdiction of this court has challenged the orders passed by the Authorities under the Payment of Wages Act, Hoshiarpur. The petitioner who was working as a Conductor employed by CR No.1504 of 1996 2 the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Hoshiarpur sought the release of wages said to have been illegally deducted by the employer. The petitioner also claimed that recovery of wages of Rs.30/- per month which were sought to be deducted was illegal as the order passed by the employer stopping his increment(s) was null and void as the same was passed without good and sufficient reasons and without following the procedure laid down under the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1970. The respondents contested the claim raised by the petitioner pleading therein that the order passed was valid and based on sufficient and good cause. Plea that the claim was time barred was also raised. Plea of the claim being time barred was rejected as prior to moving of the application under section 15 (2) of the Act the petitioner had approached the court of learned Senior Sub Judge and the petition filed by him was allowed and it was held that the order passed stopping increments of the petitioner was illegal. Appeal filed by the employer against the said order was also dismissed. However, the respondents succeeded in civil revision in this court wherein it was held that the order passed by the learned Senior Sub Judge was without jurisdiction as he was not appointed as the authority under the Act. The court, therefore, held that as the petitioner has been prosecuting his remedies bona fide he was entitled to the benefit of deduction of said period for purpose of limitation and therefore, it was held that the claim raised was within limitation. CR No.1504 of 1996 3 However, the petitioner was non-suited by holding that at present salary of the petitioner was more than Rs.1600/- and therefore, he was not covered under the Act. The appeal also failed. Mr.C.M.Chopra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the order passed by the authorities under the Act cannot be sustained as the cause of action to claim the illegal deduction had arisen to the petitioner on the date when deductions were made. It is further the case of the petitioner that at the time of deduction and on the date of filing of the petition his salary was less than Rs.1600/- and therefore, the court had jurisdiction to entertain and try the claim raised by the petitioner. Subsequent increase in the salary of the petitioner could not oust the jurisdiction which was to be seen on the date when the application was filed. There is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The impugned order, therefore, cannot be sustained on this ground as it was not open to the court to non-suit the petitioner in view of the subsequent event, that too by holding that the court had ceased to have the jurisdiction as the question of jurisdiction, was to be determined on the date of filing of the petition and not subsequent thereto. As already observed above, deduction from the wages of the petitioner was also made when his salary was less than Rs.1600/-. In view of this finding the impugned orders are required to be set aside and the case remanded back to the learned commissioner under the CR No.1504 of 1996 4 Act for determination of claim of the petitioner. However, this would be an exercise in futility as the claim of the petitioner is otherwise likely to fail for want of jurisdiction with the authorities under the Payment of Wages Act. The petitioner by filing petition under section 15 (2) of the Act has, in fact, challenged the order passed by the competent authority imposing punishment of stoppage of increment(s). The authority under the Act irrespective of the salary of the petitioner would have no jurisdiction to adjudicate on this plea, as the order of punishment can only be challenged by the petitioner by invoking the remedies under statutory service Rules or by availing his remedy before the civil court or under writ jurisdiction. The authorities under the Act have no jurisdiction. This view of mine finds support from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme, Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh 1999 (1) SCT 536. In view of the fact that the Authority under the Act has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim raised, orders impugned are upheld though for different reasons. Consequently, all the revision petitions are dismissed. It may be observed that petitioner was required to avail his remedy in accordance with law to challenge the impugned order. The petitioner, if so advised, can avail his remedy to challenge the orders of punishment in accordance with law if so advised. Acceptance of the revision petitions on the ground of jurisdiction is not an expression on the merit of the case with regard to the CR No.1504 of 1996 5 validity of order of punishment passed against the petitioner. The petitioner would, thus, have a right to challenge the order against the punishment in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case petitioner chooses to challenge the impugned order before the appropriate authority/competent court of jurisdiction along with an application for condonation of delay the fact that the petitioner has been agitating his claims since the year 1985 in different courts be taken into consideration. 23.10.2008 (Vinod K.Sharma) rp Judge