IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2973 of 2010 1. M/S SADHU BABA ZARI BOOTI AND AYURVEDIC MEDICINE'S SHOP ,REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SRI SACHIDA NAND RAJ S/O LATE SURYADEO PRASAD MEENA BAZAR,BETTIAH,DISTT-WEST CHAMPARAN,RESIDENT OF VILL- PURANI GUDARI,ARYA SAMAJ ROAD,BETTIAH,DISTT-WEST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR REPRESENTED THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR,PATNA 2. THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER -CUM -APPELLATE AUTHORITY,DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR RESOURCES BIHAR,PATNA 3. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER BETTIAH,DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN 4. PARMESHWAR PRASAD S/O BHOLA PRASAD R/O VILL BHRWALIA,P.S.MAJHOULIA,DISTT-WEST CHAMPARAN 5. NAGESHWAR PRASAD S/O BHOLA PRASAD R/O VILL BHARWALIA,P.S.MAJHOULIA,DISTT-WEST CHAMPARAN ----------- 2. 10.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and for respondent nos. 4 and 5. Respondents 4 and 5, filed an application before the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act registered as Case No. 59 of 2003, against the petitioner. It came to be dismissed on 7.8.2004 holding that the claim was for non-payment of the agreed quantum of wages and it was not a case for non-payment of minimum wages. The private respondents assailed the order in Misc. Wages Appeal No. 1 of 2005. A copy of the order of the appellate authority dated 27.4.2006, was placed by the counsel for the private respondents during submissions. The appellate authority remanded the matter back to the 2 original authority under the Minimum Wages Act which has proceeded to determine the liability of the petitioner by order dated 25.5.2007, affirmed in Minimum Wage Appeal No. 6 of 2007, which are presently assailed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 25.5.2007, does not decide the question whether the claim was with regard to difference of wages agreed upon any partly paid or whether it was a case with regard to non-payment of minimum wages. The petitioner had specifically asserted that there was a dispute with regard to the quantum of wages demanded and that paid. That issue has been left undecided. The appellate order is unreasoned and cryptic in nature showing non- application of mind to the question of law to be determined after consideration of the facts. Counsel for the State and the private respondents contended that the original order dated 7.8.2004, in Minimum Wage Case No. 59 of 2003, was set aside. On 27.4.2006 the appellate authority while remanding the matter held that it was a case under the Minimum Wages Act. This order of remand was not assailed by the petitioner. The finding with regard to the maintainability has attained finality. The only 3 determination to be done now was to direct payment of the due minimum wages. The Court finds it difficult to agree with the submissions made on behalf of the respondents. The earlier determination in Minimum Wage Case No. 59 of 2003, that the claim was one with regard to quantum of wages and not minimum wages looses its effect after remand on 27.4.2006 in Minimum Wage Appeal No. 1 of 2005. The effect of an order of remand is that the original order no more exists and the matter has to be decided afresh. There was no occasion for the appellate authority to remand the matter to the original authority if he was satisfied that the order dated 7.8.2004, was erroneous in nature and could have granted the relief itself. The effect of an order of remand has been explained in 1984 SC 897 (Smt. Kausalya Devi Bogra and others, etc., Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad and another.) at Paragraph-5 as follows :- “5. Having read the judgment of the High Court and considering the manner in which the first appeals have been disposed of, we have no doubts in our mind that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in dealing with the first appeals. This Court in exercise of appellate powers vested in it under Art. 136 of the Constitution had get aside the Bench decision of the High Court delivered in 1971 and that judgment for 4 all intents and purposes had become non- existent. The present Division Bench of the High Court was not entitled, by any process known to law, to resurrect that Judgment into life.” The order dated 27.4.2006, reveals that the specific objection of the petitioner during the appeal that the matter was not one under the Minimum Wages Act has been rejected observing that “the present was not a matter with regard to payment of wages but for payment of full minimum wages for the specified period of engagement and for payment of the balance amount”. Perhaps, no further discussion is required that on the reasoning of the appellate authority itself that it was a case relating to failure to pay full wages and directing payment of the balance dues. The remand was in this background. There was no occasion for the petitioner to challenge this order and it was open for him to persuade the original authority to hold that in fact it was not a case for payment of minimum wages which he did but the original authority in the fresh order dated 25.5.2007, has failed to decide the specific issue. The appellate order dated 4.1.2010, simply affirms the same in a cryptic manner without any discussion. No useful purpose is going to be served by remanding the matter to the appellate authority. 5 The matter is remanded to the Court of Assistant Labour Commissioner and authority, West Champaran, Bettiah, to decide Minimum Wage Case No. 59 of 2003, by a reasoned discussion, the reasons for his satisfaction that the claim was one for minimum wages and not for the balance dues for an agreed rate of wages but payment for it was made below the agreed amount. The impugned orders dated 25.5.2007 and 4.1.2010 are accordingly set aside. Let such decision be taken in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him on basis of the materials already available on record. If the parties request for a personal hearing, the authorities shall be obliged to grant the same. The writ application stands allowed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)