Sita Devi And Others vs Om Prakash Sharma

The appellants filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 1.10.2012 passed by the prescribed authority, Payment of Wages, Udaipur and the order dated 19.05.2015 passed by the Appellate Authority i.e. learned District Judge, Udaipur. The writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Bench vide order dated 19.07.2021 which is assailed in this intra court appeal.

The facts in a nutshell are that the deceased employee, Late Shri Kishan Lal worked as driver with the respondent from 1.04.2007 till 08.06.2008. When he passed away, the appellants preferred an application under Section 15(2) of Payment of Wages Act, 1936 before the prescribed authority under the Act of 1936, claiming due salary amounting to Rs.68,700/- of about 15 months and 7 days of the deceased employee. The respondent denied the averments made in the application and contended that no amount was due to the deceased employee. The prescribed authority, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence produced before it, vide order dated 1.10.2012 held that the application filed before the authority was not presented within 12 months as prescribed under Section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and that no amount was due to the deceased employee.

An appeal was filed against the said order in which the findings of fact arrived at by the prescribed authority were affirmed by the Appellate Authority. The challenge made to these orders failed with rejection of the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the orders were passed by Payment of Wages Authority and Appellate

Authority ignoring the evidence produced before them. It was contended that no satisfactory evidence was produced before Competent Authority to prove the fact that salary was actually paid to the deceased employee. Further, sufficient explanation for condonation of delay was furnished. Hence, the impugned orders are bad in the eyes of law and deserve to be set aside.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the material available on record.

We are of the view that the learned Single Bench rightly dismissed the writ petition holding that both the authorities arrived at concurrent findings of fact by appreciating the evidence produced before them.

It is not in dispute that the issues involved simple questions of fact which were concluded against the claimants by concurrent findings recorded by the Payment of Wages Authority and the Appellate Authority. We, therefore, find no reason to disturb these concurrent findings of fact as the same is supported by evidence and not vitiated in any manner. Therefore, no interference is warranted whatsoever in the order passed by learned Single Bench.

In the result, the intra court appeal fails and is dismissed being devoid of merit.

No order as to costs.