GOMANTAK MAZDOOR SANGH versus STATE OF GOA & ANR.

Citation: [2022] 3 S.C.R. 161 · Decided: 10-05-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
161
   [2022] 3 S.C.R. 161
161
GOMANTAK MAZDOOR SANGH
v.
STATE OF GOA & ANR.
(Civil Appeal No.2982 of 2022)
MAY 10, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 – ss.4, 5 and 10 – Determination /
revision of minimum wages – Errata Notification dated 14.07.2016
issued by the State of Goa in purported exercise of s.10 of the 1948
Act modifying /correcting its earlier notification dated 23/24.05.2016
– Validity of – Held: Notification dated 23/24.05.2016 was issued
in consultation with the Minimum Wage Advisory Board and
thereafter the minimum wages were revised under clause (i) of sub-
section (1) of s.4 of the 1948 Act after following due procedure as
required u/s.5 – A conscious decision was thus taken by the State
Government after consultation with the Minimum Wage Advisory
Board – Therefore, it cannot be said that there was any arithmetical
and/or clerical mistake, which could have been corrected in exercise
of powers u/s.10 of the 1948 Act – Even assuming that the State
was having the power to amend, vary or rescind the notification in
exercise of powers u/s.21 of the General Clauses Act, in that case
also, when the earlier notification dated 23/24.05.2016 was issued
after following the due procedure as required u/ss.4 and 5 of the
1948 Act, the same procedure ought to have been followed even
while varying and/or modifying the notification – Hence, notification
dated 23/24.05.2016 could not have been modified by an Errata
Notification issued in purported exercise of s.10 – Errata
Notification dated 14.07.2016 was wholly without jurisdiction and
contrary to provisions of the 1948 Act, and is thus quashed – Earlier
notification dated 23/24.05.2016, accordingly, restored – General
Clauses Act, 1897 – s.21.
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 – s.10 – Fixation / revision of
minimum rate of wages – Notification issued by State Government –
Correction of errors in the notification – Scope – Held: As per s.10,
only the clerical or arithmetical mistakes in any order fixing or
revising minimum rates of wages can be corrected.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
162
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
Words and Phrases – Expressions “arithmetical error” and
“clerical error” – Meaning of – Held: An arithmetical mistake is a
mistake of calculation while a clerical mistake is a mistake in writing
or typing.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. Vide Notification dated 23/24.05.2016, the State
Government determined the minimum wages, which included the
basic rates of wages and the special allowance. The notification
specifically stated that the said notification has been issued in
exercise of powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (1) of
section 3 read with clause (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 4 and
sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. As
can be seen from the contents of the said notification, the said
notification was issued in consultation with the Minimum Wage
Advisory Board and thereafter the minimum wages were revised.
Thus, the minimum wages were revised under clause (i) of sub-
section (1) of Section 4 after following the due procedure as
required under Section 5. [Para 6][168-C-E]
2. Once the minimum wages were revised and determined,
which included the basic rates of wages and the special allowance
as per Section 4(1)(i) of the Act, 1948, thereafter it cannot be
said that there was any clerical and/or arithmetical mistake in
mentioning clause (i). The minimum wages were revised and
determined even after consultation with the Minimum Wage
Advisory Board as required under Section 5 of the Act, 1948.
Therefore, once there was no mistake, the same could not have
been corrected in exercise of powers under Section 10 of the
Act, 1948. [Para 7][170-B-C]
3. Even as per Section 10, only the clerical or arithmetical
mistakes in any order fixing or revising minimum rates of wages
can be corrected. An arithmetical mistake is a mistake of
calculation; a clerical mistake is a mistake in writing or typing.
An error arising out of or occurring from an accidental slip or
omission is an error due to a careless or inadvertent mistake or
omission unintentionally made. [Paras 7.1 and 7.2][170-C-D, F]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
163
Master Construction Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Orissa
and Anr., [1966] 3 SCR 99 – relied on.
4. In the present case, a conscious decision was taken by
the State Government after consultation with the Minimum Wage
Advisory Board and thereafter the minimum wages were revised
and det

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.