HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. T.P.SHARMA& HON'BLE MR. R.L. JHANWAR, JJ, Criminal Contempt Case No. 04/2005 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS (Contemnorsl VERSUS 1. 2. 3. Authority, Minim.un'i Wages Aet, 1948 Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.). P.P. Gupta, Managing Director Techno Electric Engineering Company Ltd., P-46 A, Radha Bazar Kolkata-700001. N.L. Sharma, through Managing Director Techno Electric Engineering Co. Lfd. P. -46 A, Radha Bazar Kolkata -700001. Sri Ram Narayan Vyas, Advocate, 24 Vivekanand Nagar Raipur. REFERENCE UNDER SECTION 15(2) OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971. Present:- Shri Ashish Shukla, G.A. for the petitioner/Stafe. Shri N.K. Yyas, Advocate for the contemnor/respondent No. 3. None for the respondents/contemnors NQ. 1 85 2. ORAL-ORDER (Passed on 09/11/2010) The following iudgment ofthe Court was passed by T.P. Sharma, J:- . 1. Heard. '••,::y\ ' 2. This is a referenee under Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of; Courts Act, 1971 at the instance of authority under Minimu'm. Wages Act, 1948, Korba (inshort 'the Acf of 1948'). .--•\7 •••^r^ 3. 'i'°Wt 4. /\ As per reference authority under the Act of 1948 was while discharging its judicial function in a judicial proceeding in case No. 43-MWA/05 filed by Inspector under the Act of 1948 against respondents No. 1 8s 2, preliminary objection relating maintainability of the case was filed by contemnor No. 3 on behalf of the contemnors No. 1 & 2 in which following alleged scandalous/contemptuous allegations have been made °it is respectfully submitted that the case is ill founded and is based on flim.sv nresumption of Asstt. Labour Commissioner, Korba in connivance with the Inspector under the minimum wages Act". On the basis of aforesaid allegation show cause notice was issued by the authority under the Act of 1948 and after receiving reply present reference has been made by the authority under the Act of 1948. On perusal of reference, petition filed on behalf of the Inspector under the Act of 1948 preliminary objection filed by contemnor No. 3 on behalf of the contemnors No. 1 SE 2 which reveal that while filing preliminary objection contemnors have made allegation that case is ill fpunded and is based on flimsy presumption of Asstt. Labour Commissioner, Korba in connivance with the Inspector under the minimum wages Act. These two words namely ninisy oresunaption and in connivance has been made by the contemnors for Assistant LatSour Commissioner and Inspector under fhe Act of 1948 but they have not alleged or made any allegation against the :^ ;^K:is1^ '*»- .,.,».;* •Kl^' 1 •"",/' SUiar ...^. authority under the Act. Words used by contemnors may be cpntemptuous for Assistant Labour Commissioner or Inspector under the Act. of 1948 but preliminary objection clearly reveal that contemnors have not made any scandals or contemptuous allegation against the aufhority under the Act of 1948, who has made reference for initiation of criminal contempt proceeding agairist contemnors. In absence of any scandalous or contemptuous allegation or act committed by co'ntemnors against the authority under the Act of 1948who has made reference for initiation of contempt proceeding under Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the initiation of contempt proceeding Would not be just and legal even if the authority was Court at the time of its function although, we are not opining any view regarding the fact that at the time of discharging its function authority was Court or ndt for the purpose of initiation of contempt proceeding. Consequently, in absence of any scandalous and contemptuous allegations against authority who has made reference for initiation of contempt proceeding, present proceeding is liable to be-drooped and is hereby dropped. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge