1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 4125/1997 Jasveer Singh Vs. Surja Ram & Ors. ......... Date of Order : 12th February, 2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. D.K.Parihar for the petitioner. None present for the respondents. BY THE COURT By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order Annex.1 dated 28.08.1997. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on an application filed by the respondents No. 1 to 7 before the respondent No.8, the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Sriganganagar (for short 'the Payment of Wages Authority' hereinafter) under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (for short 'the Act of 1936' hereinafter), the respondent No.8, Payment of Wages Authority proceeded ex- 2 parte by order dated 26.3.1992 and by order impugned Annex.1 directed the petitioner under Section 15 (3) of the Act of 1936 to pay the due salary of Rs. 34500/- and compensation of Rs. 7000/- amounting to Rs. 41500/- to each of the respondents within 30 days from the order impugned. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, before proceeding ex-parte, evidence of Postman who on the envelope Registered AD. under which the notice was sent to the petitioner endorsed that the petitioner refused to accept the notice, has not been examined and therefore, it cannot be said that there was a proper service on the petitioner. The order has been passed by the respondent Payment of Wages Authority under Section 15 (3) of the Act of 1936. Section 17 of the Act of 1936 provides for an appeal, which reads as under :- “17. Appeal.- (1) An appeal against an order dismissing either wholly or in part an application made under sub-section (2) of section 15, or against a direction made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of that section may be preferred, within thirty days of the date on which the order or direction was made, in a Presidency-town before the Court of Small Causes and elsewhere before the District Court- (a) By the employer or other person 3 responsible for the payment of wages under Section 3, if the total sum directed to be paid by way of wages and compensation exceeds three thousand or such direction has the effect of imposing on the employer or the other person a financial liability exceeding one thousand rupees or (b) by an employed person or any legal practitioner or any official of a registered trade union authorised in writing to act on his behalf or any Inspector under this Act, or any other person permitted by the authority to make an application under sub-section (2) of Section 15, if the total amount of wages claimed to have been withheld from the employed person exceeds twenty rupees or from the unpaid group to which the employed person belongs or belonged exceeds fifty rupees, or (c) by any person directed to pay a penalty under sub-section (4) of section 15. (1A) No appeal under clause (a) of sub- section (1) shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the authority to the effect that the appellant has deposited the amount payable under the direction appealed against. (2) Save as provided in sub-section (1), any 4 order dismissing either wholly or in part an application made under sub-section (2) of Section 15, or a direction made under sub- section (3) or sub-section (4) of that section shall be final. (3) Where an employer prefers an appeal under this section, the authority against whose decision the appeal has been preferred may, and if so directed by the court referred to in sub-section (1) shall, pending the decision of the appeal, withhold payment of any sum in deposit with it. (4) The court referred to in sub-section (1) may, if it thinks fit, submit any question of law for the decision of the High Court and, if it so does, shall decide the question in conformity with such decision.” Sub-section (1A) of Section 17 provides that no appeal under clause (a) of sub-section (1) shall lie unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the authority to the effect that the appellant has deposited the amount payable under the direction appealed against. The proviso is almost para-materia to the provisions of Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Be that as it may, a statutory and efficacious remedy of appeal has been provided under Section 17 of the Act of 1936 and the petitioner has filed 5 the instant writ petition without availing and exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal, obviously to circumvent the mandatory provisions of Section 17 (1A) of the Act of 1936 which makes it abundantly clear that an appeal can only lie if the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the authority to the effect that the appellant has deposited the amount payable under the direction appealed against. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is not entertainable without exhausting the alternative and efficacious statutory remedy of appeal under Section 17 of the Act of 1936. In the circumstances, therefore, I find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. Stay petition also stands dismissed. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp