HARYANA UNRECOGNISED SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 253 · Decided: 12-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

HARYANA UNRECOGNISED SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION 
A 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
APRIL, 12, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
Labour Law : 
Minimum Wages Act, 1948: Sections 2(i), 3, 5(2), 27 and Schedule, 
pa1t I, Item 40. 
Addition to Schedule--Teaclws in educational institlltiom~ssue of 
notification to bring them within pwview of Act-Held : teachei,· were not 
employees under S.2(i)-Hence, could not be brought within pwview of Act 
by notification under S.27 for fixing their minimum wages. 
Interpretation of Statutes.: 
Statzlte-Beneficial interpretation-Applicability of-Related only to 
those employments which are intended to be covered by Statute and not to 
others. 
The State Government in exercise of po\\·er conferred under Section 
27 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 added in part I of the Schedule Item 
No. 40 describing "Employment in Private coaching classes, schools includ-
ing Nursery Schools and technical institutions", for the purpose of fixing 
minimum rate of wages for the employees. therein. By a Notification the 
State Government in exercise of power conferred under Section 5(2) of the 
Act fixed the minimum rate of wages in respect of the different categories 
of employees serving in such schools. Writ petition challenging the 
aforesaid notification so far as it related to teachers \\'ere filed in the High 
Court which were dismissed. Aggrieved by the High Court's judgment the 
appellant preferred the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. A combined reading of Sections 2(i), 3 and 27 of the 
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 as well as the statement of Objects and Reasons 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
of the legislation make it explicitely clear that the State Government can H 
253 
254 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
add to either Part of the Schedule any employment where persons are 
employed for hire or reward to do any work skilled or unskilled, manual 
or clerical. If the persons employed do not do the work of any skilled or 
unskilled or of a manual or clerical nature then it would not be possible 
for the State Government to include such an employment in the Schedule 
B 
c 
in exercise of power under Section 27 of the Act. Since the teachers of an 
educational institution are not employed to do any skilled or unskilled 
manual or clerical work and therefore could not be held to be an employee 
under Section 2(i). of the Act, it is beyond the competence of the State 
Government to bring them under the purview of the Act by adding the 
employment in education institution in the Schedule in exercise of power 
under Section 27 of the Act. Hence the State Government in exercise of 
powers under the Act is not entitled to fix minimum wages of such teachers. 
The impugned notifications so far as the teachers of the educational 
institution are concerned are accordingly quashed. [258-G-H; 259-A-B; F] 
Miss A. Sundarambal v. Government of Goa, Daman & Diu and 
D Others, [1988] 4 sec 42, relied on. 
E 
F 
G 
Ministry of Labour & Rehabilitation and another v. Tiffin's Barytes 
Asbestos & Paints Ltd. and another, [1985] 3 SCC 594, referred to. 
2. It is true that while construing the provisions of a statute like 
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 a beneficial interpretation has to he preferred 
which advances the object of the Act. But nevertheless it has to he borne 
in mind that the beneficial interpretation should relate only to those 
employments which are intended to be covered by the Act and not to others. 
[257-G-H] 
M/s. Bhikusa Yamasa Kshat1iya and another v. Sangamner Ako/a 
Taluka Bidi Kamgar Union and Otliers, (1963] 2 SC 242, referred tu. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7114 of 
1996. 
Prom the Judgment and Order date.cl 28.9.92 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 3599 of 1983. 
S.M. Bhandari, Vipin Nair and Rajiv Dutta for the Appellant. 
H 
Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal and Ms. Indu Malhotra for the Respondent. 
HARYANA UNRECOGNISED s.CHOOLS ASSN. v. STATE 
255 
The following Order of the Court was delivered by 
A 
PATIANAIK, J. Leave granted. 
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the 
Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 3599 of 1983 B 
dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellants. 
The short question that arises for consideration is whether teachers 
of an educational institution can be held to be employee under Section 2(i) 
of the Minimum Wages Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to enable 
the

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